|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
242
|
Posted - 2016.07.19 19:55:21 -
[1] - Quote
45thtiger 0109 wrote:WIS has been squashed for years and I do not think CCP will bring WIS back. If CCP had ever made WiS a meaningful part of EVE - people would suicide gank your implants *inside* the station 24/7. I've never understood why anybody ever actually wanted that... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
250
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 11:17:29 -
[2] - Quote
Towron Paboo wrote:I started two month ago...and now I will quit again. Reason is, that I get killed over and over again in high-sec while mining some minerals and afterwards getting mails that press charges. As long as a game says that it is legal to kill newbies while they try to find out how the game works. I won't pay for something like that...sandbox or not...there should be an area where I am save, especially as a newbie. So you won't get new players when most of them make such an anoying experience. Have fun. As an actual new player (up to 1 month old per CCP I believe) - you are safe in the rookie systems designated by CCP - but yeah there is nothing worth mining in them, and they get mined out fast every day, so you probably weren't in one.
You could also try learning how to fit a tank onto your ship, or just try something other than mining... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
252
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 12:20:28 -
[3] - Quote
Tao Dolcino wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote: or just try something other than mining... Yes, but it's not a solution : someone has to mine, at the end, so his point is valid. It's a bit the same than when a new pilot says : earning ISK is difficult with mining, and a vet answers : "don't bother, mate, just buy a PLEX and sell it for ISK". How often i read that kind of sentences from vets. "mining is not worth it, give up". Then who will mine the ore we all need ? Mining and missions are the two main ways to start making ISK in EVE, and new players are always told that these activities are not "noble", (but ganking noob miners is noble ) All what you vets have to propose to the new players is : pay to win. Buy PLEX with real money, sell it, so you don't have to work hard for your ISK. Then where is the sense of accomplishment ? Why mining the hard way is carebear, and pay to win gankers are hardcore ? Isn't there something hypocrite in all that ? I understand very well why new miners leave EVE. I have never recommended buying plex to anybody - but then I'm against micro-transactions in general.
I advocate their getting into missions starting out - particularly the rookie missions that give them a big boost in isk/skills/equipment.
People will always mine - and if they are smart they'll find the profitable areas to do it and learn to defend themselves in their chosen home. **** I didn't even tell him not to mine - I gave him *2* options. Learn to protect himself *or* do something else.
Why are you all so eager to take offence? One would think you felt guilty about your chosen profession of mining...Seriously, stop being so defensive.
PS: I'm not saying ganking miners is noble. I'm not a part of CODE, and I have no interest in that style of play. But they *are* part of the game - so burying your head in the sand and pretending gankers don't exist is just stupid. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
252
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 12:32:28 -
[4] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Towron Paboo wrote:As long as a game says that it is legal to kill newbies while they try to find out how the game works. I won't pay for something like that...sandbox or not...there should be an area where I am save, especially as a newbie.
But you were so close! You already found out an important part of how the game works: there is no area where you're safe. Well they newbie systems are safe zones kind of so that's one myth debunked straight away. They are not. You can perfectly shoot a vet on the undock of Pator Tech school. Just can't grief the new players there. Consider the myth bunked again ;-) TBH I kind of miss the days when CCP didn't enforce their rules on rookie griefing. I got a lot of my early PvP experience counter-baiting the people picking on new players in those systems....I think my record was about 150 in a single month. Seriously, they were almost as bad as the new players they were picking on - and oh so much more satisfying.
In any case, as I say, the official CCP line in the sand is 1 month of age or less in such systems is protected - anything over 30 days and you are fair game even there. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
252
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 13:19:58 -
[5] - Quote
Crinnfika wrote:The biggest problem is... Perhaps the *biggest* problem is that so many EVE players are so eager to tell CCP what the "biggest" problem is - and 1000 players will provide 1000 *different* problems - all 100% sure that theirs is the "biggest" one..... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
255
|
Posted - 2016.07.20 20:46:54 -
[6] - Quote
Crinnfika wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Crinnfika wrote:The biggest problem is... Perhaps the *biggest* problem is that so many EVE players are so eager to tell CCP what the "biggest" problem is - and 1000 players will provide 1000 *different* problems - all 100% sure that theirs is the "biggest" one..... yes and? My statement is still true. Eve has pretty much non-existence marketing and is largely unknown outside of it's own playerbase. Without new blood the game will invariably die over time. This is how the world works. EVE has a lot of problems. I'm not disagreeing that is one of them...but I don't think it is "The Biggest Problem" in all of EVE...
I thought I was pretty clear about that... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
256
|
Posted - 2016.07.21 00:02:37 -
[7] - Quote
Chewytowel Haklar wrote:It probably has something to do with not being able to just jump in and getting loads of content spoon fed to you all while being constantly reminded how legendary you are. Every single time you do a simple task you get an achievement celebrating your amazing skill at doing simple tasks, "Congrats you logged into the game! 10 achievement points." Have you *seen* the "Opportunities" notifications? And they've added *payouts* to them now. And they can't even ****ing remember which ones I've already done before.
I **** you not - I just got a(nother) message stating that I get a whole 100.000 isk for *chatting in local* for the first time.... On an 8 year old character that has probably spoken in local at least a few thousand times.... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
258
|
Posted - 2016.07.21 10:41:42 -
[8] - Quote
Noah Reese wrote: I looked him up, he lost ONE ship, a retriever, while mining in a 0.6 system. There's 3 barges for a reason, he chose the one that blows up easily while being in a 0.6 system and a very busy one at that (Isanamo). If a player chooses to make 3 silly decisions then the outcome is predictable.
So you can take your "woe is me" with you, CCP has been catering for the low effort carebears for years.
He also couldn't be bothered to even use his rig slots *at all* - about as un-tanky as a ship gets yeah. And yeah, I did get a chuckle about the "over and over again" being...1 whole time in his entire EVE life...
@Detshni - CCP protects new players now more than they ever have in the past. What exactly are you talking about here:
Detshni wrote:When CCP decided that there should be nowhere left for newbies to hide, and be safe, THAT is when the game started to go downhill for me. Because as far as I know, the exact opposite is what happened...
Are you just saying a player should be "new" as long as they feel new, rather than based on anything as silly as character age? What is your actual complaint here? |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
261
|
Posted - 2016.07.21 16:06:17 -
[9] - Quote
Chewytowel Haklar wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:How is it that all these people who are somehow posting on the forums not playing the game any more? You know you have to be subbed to post here right? Whether or not you've done that with plex, or cash, I just don't believe you're legitimately 'gone' if you're posting here. I was gone since January, only came back a few weeks ago myself. I didn't pay CCP just to play 'Forums Online'. You know Facebook is free right? And Reddit?
Yeah, but they could also have bought a yearly sub, plexed for several months just to keep skill training going, or whatever other viable reason. I know I for one was on a yearly subscription and am paid up through the 13th of October.
You do *not* need a subscription to post here - just a valid pilot's license. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 11:25:41 -
[10] - Quote
Nana Skalski wrote:I think wardec mechanisms must be changed. Now you can just grief with it, people drop corp and they are invulnerable then. So the war should come only to those who really will fight. Military Sections for corporations or different player corporation types maybe?
You will not get more kills, or less, but people will be less pissed off by it. The saddest part is that it is probably only a matter of time before CCP breaks down and makes combat 100% optional for you...
My question, however, is: Why do people with this opinion play the game *now* - when such changes haven't been made? And why do you seem to suffer the delusion that EVE was ever some wonderful peaceful Utopia where big mean bullies couldn't pick on poor unarmed noobs like you? |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 11:51:51 -
[11] - Quote
Nana Skalski wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Nana Skalski wrote:I think wardec mechanisms must be changed. Now you can just grief with it, people drop corp and they are invulnerable then. So the war should come only to those who really will fight. Military Sections for corporations or different player corporation types maybe?
You will not get more kills, or less, but people will be less pissed off by it. The saddest part is that it is probably only a matter of time before CCP breaks down and makes combat 100% optional for you... My question, however, is: Why do people with this opinion play the game *now* - when such changes haven't been made? And why do you seem to suffer the delusion that EVE was ever some wonderful peaceful Utopia where big mean bullies couldn't pick on poor unarmed noobs like you? Stay on topic for petes sake. We want more players right? Everyone must be wardeckable and must be open for griefeing in high sec, right? What about NPC corps? What about people who would want to have their own corp but dont want to be wardeced like NPC corps? Game is giving them middle finger now. But people are in NPC corps and can always go to low sec if they want and attack people there, not in high sec. So what is your point? High sec is a safe heaven (as safe as it gets) for a lot of people. Why do you think majority of people stay in High sec all the time? Are they delusional? Nope, they just like to chill most of the time, or the environment is fitting. If they could, they would really make it more safe, and go to war only when they want, with those who want, such High sec would be a bit better than its now. CCP will have to notice that eventually. It has taken them 13 years - but they *are already* making changes to accomodate people like you. Ironically, you are complaining more now *after* their changes to make high-sec safer for you than you complained in the 13 years when there were literally no safeguards in place to protect you in high sec other than a CONCORD who was even slower than they are now.....
And I am staying on topic, I'm replying directly to what you are saying and asking legitimate, honest questions. I know why people *leave* the game after finding out how hostile the modern high-sec is to their play-style......but I honestly don't know why they *start* playing the game in the first place....Because EVE has literally been like that for 13 years - and the only changes were CCP's attempts to make high-sec *safer*.
Granted CCP certainly *failed* to make high-sec safer....but perhaps that should be a warning to you as you demand that CCP steps in to do even more... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 11:53:43 -
[12] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:It's the fact that they can get wardecced for no reason that's the issue, there should to be a reason for a wardec besides having the cash to do it.
Then there's the expansions, they have promised a lot but delivered very little as far as a large part of the player base is concerned.
Even the events recently have left a lot to be desired by turning either into a grindfest or the players being given very little info of what to do with the things you are supposed to be hunting.
Maybe that is a part of it, the fact that CCP throw things to the player base without bothering to explain what exactly it is, or what an individual is supposed to do with it.
Maybe it's the 2 main devs driving the direction of eve that's the problem, both of whom just seem to ignore the majority of players.
Whatever the reason, 4 players I have introduced to the game all quit within weeks because of the mechanics and bullshit surrounding the game and corps. I have pretty much the same thing to say to you: That has been EVE since day 1 in 2003...
Literally the *only* thing that has changed in the past 13 years is that CCP is finally trying to listen to you and provide more content and more safety...
Sure they kind of suck at it...but again they always have...since 2003....
So...what did you really *expect* when you joined the game?
edit: And *where did that expectation come from* - because it certainly wasn't based on anything in the game or in reality... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 11:57:05 -
[13] - Quote
To both of you, and everyone like you, a brief disclaimer:
I'm not even disagreeing with you that the system is broken. I *know* you are right, and this is why a lot of people leave EVE. So please don't feel the need to defend that. I get that part, and as I say I *agree*.
I just don't think the solution is as simple as you seem to think it is...
And I'm not sure you realize that this isn't some new thing...this is just...EVE... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 12:04:49 -
[14] - Quote
Nana Skalski wrote:I will not speak for all those players, they have speak up on many accasions themselves in CCP pools. In my case it was a perspective to fly a spaceship and walk in stations. Doing spaceshippy stuff. Ironically, the CCP did not make high sec safer, because they did it wrong way. Even ganking can be removed from the game by making player weapons with safes not to shoot another capsuleers in High sec.
CCP cant design good systems for majority of players, they are catering to ilusionary space wikings in null. That is why they cant have more players. Well believe it or not they really do seem to be trying to accomodate you - and as slow/bumpy as the road may be, this is actually much faster/smoother than most EVE changes have *historically* been.
Only time will tell - but I suspect in a few years they may get EVE close to the state you want it in. Give them some time and see how it goes. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 12:07:45 -
[15] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:I'm not talking about myself so stop with the "you" I'm merely offering an opinion.
I do whatever I want to in the game as I learnt a long time ago to have standby alts so in a wardec I just laugh and carry on.
But how about addressing the other points? Or are you just interested in more targets rather than any other aspect of the game? I was addressing the other points as well. PvE in EVE has always been a joke. Until the past couple of years we didn't even have the events. It was literally just the same canned missions/anomalies/etc from 2003....Pathetic as the modern additions are....they are competing with *nothing whatsoever*....so it is "progress"
CCP has never explained their updates, and historically they have always been half-finished and buggy. You are lucky, because the past few years have again seen drastic improvements in that department.
You can imagine some glorious golden past all you want - but the past few years have seen *more* game development done *better* than ever before in EVE's history...
edit: Semi-Unrelated side-note: I personally don't much care for the direction EVE is heading - this is why *I* have unsubscribed.
However, I'm not saying they don't need to go there to survive. I can see how far the game has fallen into chaos and abuse with the current mechanics - and I don't particularly enjoy the blanket-dec or ganking environment myself, even though it doesn't *directly* affect me. Something has to change - and CCP is changing it. I honestly think if you just hang in there and give them a few more years they'll bring the game into the modern age and it will be a lot better for most players. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 12:26:04 -
[16] - Quote
Nana Skalski wrote:Half assed attempts to keep the spirit of EVE in majority to satisfy current players. CCP was always afraid they will lose the precious few pleyers they had, so they made only small iterations. That speeds up the process of consolidating around the system flaws and removes those who see them clearly and dont agree with sitiation its heading into. Spirit of EVE was always this harsh one. CCP could not separate it to null sec, they always wanted everyone to move to null because of big space battles and once in a while a news header. You could see that they did when the war broke up. There was player surge, but it dropped again when the war was over. A small succes, shortlived. CCP was fixated on wrong things all those 13 years to talk about more players now. Game has reputation of being overly cruel to common carebear, so they will not have those other players that only in option give something about wardecs and wars. I think they may have finally given up on trying to hold on to their original player-base - at least outside of 0.0, and possibly even there soon. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 12:49:25 -
[17] - Quote
Nana Skalski wrote:No, I dont believe even wardec changes that will come, will bring new kind of players, but they will make stay some a bit longer.
Nothing can help to bring new kind of players to this game. Current game market is even against it. Time will tell - but if they keep trying to ride the fence EVE may just finally die.
I mean people like me are quitting now because they *are* making changes to appeal to the modern gamer....If the modern gamers also quit because they drag their feet or just can't make the game appealing they aren't going to be left with much... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 13:08:36 -
[18] - Quote
Drago Shouna wrote:Flitz Farseeker wrote:[pedant on] If there really were less players every year then the peak number of users would have been in the first year of the game, which is not the case and can be clearly seen in various graphs including the one on eve-offline.net. [pedant off] Possible reasons numbers are down at the moment include summer holidays, Pokemon Go and the Donald. Nope it's nothing to do with any of that. When I started playing in 2012 there was nearly always 50k+ players on at most times of the day, now we struggle to see a regular 20k+ online even at peak times. Even the stats from CCP show a big decline in users. Interestingly the peak came in early 2013 - just before they doubled down and re-released micro-transactions into the game and began their modern development plan/cycle....
A paranoid person might think it was related... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
272
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 13:58:11 -
[19] - Quote
MidnightWyvern wrote:Nana Skalski wrote:Quote:For over decade the missions have been the same. One would think they would come up with more variation to spawn and loot in rooms or procedural mission system in general. The Lore is one of the shinier things here. But I think that EVE 2.0 would be dead on arrival as everyone with closing of EVE will completely lack interest for further playing, so much is attached to this world. If they would keep EVE, everyone would stay here. But they are developing other games in EVE universe. The issue is that whenever they try and make EVE more engaging the neckbeards come out of the woodwork and make dumb threads about how having to actually be active in the game to accomplish things is counter to the "spirit of EVE Online" and is just CCP trying to dumb it down for casuals. Personally, I would be a mission runner if all the NPCs were dangerous and there was some variety in the kinds I could fight. Confirming this is the *only* issue with EVE.
No other problems exist.
Ever.
Everyone move along... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
273
|
Posted - 2016.07.22 15:22:41 -
[20] - Quote
MidnightWyvern wrote:Man, I sure do love people construing my statements in ways I didn't intend.
To clarify, my response was specifically a response to the statement about the current state of missions. Trying to make it seem like I was saying that's the only problem in the game is honestly just silly. I really hope you're better than that. Perhaps I'm over-reacting to the fact that every 3-4 posts in this thread (and that is a lot of posts, even just in this 1 thread) the post begins with something along the lines of:
"The Problem with EVE is..." "The Primary Problem is..." "The Main Problem is..." etc...
And acting like if just that 1 problem was solved things would magically be better.
If that was not your intention then I apologize - but as previously stated there are many thousands of major problems with EVE atm, so pointing to any 1 of them as "the problem" for anything is ridiculous. |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
292
|
Posted - 2016.07.24 11:18:34 -
[21] - Quote
Nana Skalski wrote:Move to null if you want war. Actually CCP may be on the tracks there.
To repopulate it in different way now.
Only if we could have more those players who beside shooting easy targets would like to move to null and be actually in some risk there.
Where are you, hardened PvP ers with a lot of ISK for wardecs? You still chase the bunny, not wanting to come up to the challenge of bigger pray that can bite back? 0.0 space is surprisingly bad for PvP - unless you really enjoy just being a small, insignificant piece of a much larger fleet led by somebody else, or you happen to be one of the few people who can handle the stress of leading a 1000 person fleet - which is much like herding 1000 cats...
And the reason these fleets exist is to either conquer or protect the space *so that the PvE players can farm it*. Because ultimately, 0.0 is primarily for hard-core PvE players who want to make a LOT of money. Sure they get to hop into fleets and shoot things from time to time if they want to, but that is just a break from their PvE farming.
So - why don't *you* and all the other people who supposedly want to PvE get your lazy rear ends out to 0.0 space where you could make some serious money doing it, instead of derping around high sec for arguably more direct risk and far less rewards? |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
314
|
Posted - 2016.07.27 19:01:27 -
[22] - Quote
TBH i don't think Lucy is going to be satisfied until he gets a formal, public apology from CCP in which they admit that their game is horrible and worse than any other game on earth....or he gets himself banned. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
318
|
Posted - 2016.07.27 19:55:54 -
[23] - Quote
Lucy...I still don't necessarily agree with everything you are saying - but thank you for finally coming out and simply stating your opinions, instead of asking leading questions and trying to force people to come to the conclusion you want them to.
These forums are still full of trolls, and they are still going to yell at you/etc probably - but at least they'll be arguing with what you are saying instead of the way you are saying it.
o7 |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
329
|
Posted - 2016.07.28 17:09:07 -
[24] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Brokk Witgenstein wrote:So THIS is what vets mean *chanting* one of us one of us one of us Brokk has officially reached bittervet level 1
4 more levels to go |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
343
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 20:17:27 -
[25] - Quote
Cerius Lennar wrote:Why not stiffer penalties to security status at trade hubs? Doesn't make sense in a story fashion that a trade system would allow such a threat to its existence. Feels like a lot of what CCP does is to bank on their players and the massive divide in skills between new and long standing players. Seems to me they are no longer interested in making the game enjoyable for new corps or new players. If they don't have our best interests at hand, then the numbers will continue to decline, simple. TBH CCP has never much cared for the centralized trade hubs - they are very hard on the game servers. So good luck with that one.... If anything they are more likely to lower security there to push people to spread out =P |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
343
|
Posted - 2016.07.29 20:24:14 -
[26] - Quote
Cerius Lennar wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Cerius Lennar wrote:Why not stiffer penalties to security status at trade hubs? Doesn't make sense in a story fashion that a trade system would allow such a threat to its existence. Feels like a lot of what CCP does is to bank on their players and the massive divide in skills between new and long standing players. Seems to me they are no longer interested in making the game enjoyable for new corps or new players. If they don't have our best interests at hand, then the numbers will continue to decline, simple. TBH CCP has never much cared for the centralized trade hubs - they are very hard on the game servers. So good luck with that one.... If anything they are more likely to lower security there to push people to spread out =P Spread out would be nicer yes, but logically how we function as a society in real life, it wouldn't reorganize that way. Another trade hub would just emerge, with the same problems. Agreed, which is why they don't do that.
But my point is the trade hubs are purely a player invention, quietly disliked by CCP. Not a CCP invention that the game lore requires them to protect with higher security. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
355
|
Posted - 2016.08.01 14:02:20 -
[27] - Quote
Just release a modular t3 industrial ship that can get the mining yield of 3 hulks, *or* have a cargohold the size of a freighter, *or* a fleet hangar the size of an orca's, *or* provide maxed mining boosts, *or* a ship hold the size of the bowhead's, *or* the tank of a rorqual, *or* any convoluted combination of any/all of these things in the amount desired by the pilot. (I may have missed a few but you get the idea)
Let them have the same overly complicated choices as us combat pilots - with the same OP results in 1-2 specific configurations that everybody will end up going with |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
360
|
Posted - 2016.08.01 14:39:27 -
[28] - Quote
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:The greedy and the silly would still fit them terrible and still die to ganks And the problem is....??? |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
360
|
Posted - 2016.08.01 20:53:37 -
[29] - Quote
Lex Gabinia wrote:Dracvlad wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Ralph King-Griffin wrote: Tell you what so, you go tell the rest of eve to stob being beligerant gobshites to one another and we'll take it from there .
We're trying to tell CCP not to pick sides. That's all. That's what I would say too. Just in case you missed it: CCP designed a game to be harsh, dark and gritty. They picked sides before anyone started playing. This seems to be hard for some people to grasp. If EVE is to stay EVE then CCP will always side with a harsher play style. Accept it, adapt or move on seem to be the only choices. Lies.
CCP keeps denying my request to spawn concord at will to kill random people who annoy me in local...
And they won't even give me a polaris frigate fitted up with concord weaponry to murder you all in...
Those would be harsher play styles - but for some reason they don't like the idea |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
361
|
Posted - 2016.08.01 22:25:40 -
[30] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:baltec1 wrote: Pirates go where the trade lanes are, their content does not exist outside of highsec.
Yeah, their "content" shoots back outside of hisec There is that, but outside of HS you'll be hard pressed an imprudent freighter pilot flying around with billions in his cargo hold. True, the wormhole-bears usually use orcas to move their billions of isk in easy loot from the low-sec WH exit to try to get it to a market hub... Or at least they did last time I lived in low-sec |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
361
|
Posted - 2016.08.01 23:44:11 -
[31] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Were they doing things like not using a scout. Autopiloting? No webber? No escort at all? TBH I only saw a few groups... but 2 of them did not use scouts, and the third used a *very* expensively fit tengu to scout... He did manage to get his orca through with that one - but we still got 4 billion isk in loot from the tengu escort, so we were happy lol.
Idiocy is not limited to high-sec in EVE - it is universe-wide. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
363
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 12:01:43 -
[32] - Quote
People always talk about all the "new players" getting ganked...but all i see are 6+ month old characters getting ganked...
How old do you have to be in EVE these days to no longer consider yourself or be considered by others to be "new"?
I mean..back when I got recruited into EVE the friend who recruited me took me on a ratting trip into low-sec....and he and I were 100% sure we would be fine because *his* friend was along to protect us - and his friend was a grizzled 1.5 month old Veteran in an inconceivably powerful Vexor, so we were pretty much untouchable...
I mean sure we were wrong... But even so I considered myself pretty old and experienced in EVE by the 2-3 month mark... I'd been through a few wars (and gotten some kills, even a couple solo ones), I knew what I was doing, I was close to breaking into level 4 missions... I knew by then that I wasn't at the *top* of the EVE food chain - but I certainly didn't consider myself a "noob" anymore...
So how have we gone from that to a modern EVE where everybody less than 5 years old is somehow a "noob" who couldn't possibly know how to play the game properly by now and can't be held responsible for their own actions and/or mistakes??? |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
363
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 12:03:51 -
[33] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:Using one of Chribba's wonderful graphs over at Eveoffline, roughly 50-60 new characters were created every hour over the last week, that's circa 8400 new characters in a week, using 50 an hour as a baseline; admittedly a goodly chunk of those will be alts so for arguments sake we'll cut that number by 2/3 giving us 2800 potential new players. I'll also assume that the most likely ship for a newbie to be mining with is a Venture, because they get one from the tutorial, and that all Ventures are flown by newbies To be fair - new account data is also skewed since the release of skill injectors as people are making a lot of farming alts. Since they are self-sustaining in terms of PLEX/etc, people are making quite a LOT of them, and adding to their farming armies as we go here.
No way to calculate it accurately - just something to be aware of. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
366
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 12:37:04 -
[34] - Quote
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:The sample size is larger than the amount required to be representative, or are you going to claim now to be an expert in scientific method? Pedant Mode Activated:
That would be Statistical Analysis, not the Scientific Method.
edit: Also statistics don't *prove* anything. Ever. It is not possible. Statistics merely *indicate* things - and when applied unscrupulously they can be used to *indicate* pretty much anything you want them to.... People who consider statistics to be "scientific" or even entirely trustworthy are, on the whole, idiots.
This is not a comment on your statistics in particular - just on statistics in general, as it is something of a pet peeve of mine. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
367
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 12:48:44 -
[35] - Quote
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Shae Tadaruwa wrote:The sample size is larger than the amount required to be representative, or are you going to claim now to be an expert in scientific method? Pedant Mode Activated: That would be Statistical Analysis, not the Scientific Method. In this case, the question to answer is whether ganking a significant issue. That can be answered just as well using the scientific method as it can by statistical analysis. So pedant away all you like. Statistical analysis being a tool used extensively in science, both terms can be used here depending on your level of abstraction. Analysis of the data itself, statistical. Answering questions, just as relevant application of scientific method. Um...No...
This is the scientific method:
1) Define a question 2) Gather information and resources (observe) 3) Form an explanatory hypothesis 4) Test the hypothesis by performing an experiment and collecting data in a reproducible manner 5) Analyze the data 6) Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis 7) Publish results 8) Retest (frequently done by other scientists)
Your statistics can only carry you as far as step 3. You are missing steps 4 through 8. And good luck getting published in a recognized scientific format for peer review in steps 7 and 8...
edit: Disclaimer: This is a very highly simplified form of the scientific method - you can read the link I put above for more detail...but this is *very* different from simple statistic gathering/analysis.
Statistics are a *tool* that can be used in science (albeit not a very reliable one in general) - but they are not in and of themselves scientific. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
367
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 13:01:55 -
[36] - Quote
In terms of ganking - I actually agree that it doesn't have a particularly significant impact on the game as a whole. The vast majority of shipping does go through unmolested, and even most miners don't have significant issues with ganking.
There are individual cases who are very heavily impacted by ganking - but they are the exception rather than the rule I am sure.
However, due to the nature of the game and the extremely variable nature of ganking (since it involves so many players with lives *outside* of the game/etc)...true scientific testing of a theory regarding the impact of ganking is virtually impossible. You can't *prove* anything one way or another.
So yes, statistics are probably the best you are going to get....But as previously mentioned statistics can also be manipulated to show anything you ****ing well want them to show...so both sides are going to show the statistics that favour their viewpoint, and you guys can keep on arguing until the end of time. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
369
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 13:10:24 -
[37] - Quote
For example - baltec has already shown how statistics can be heavily skewed to favour his own viewpoint in the example he gave:
He gave us Red Frog data - indicating how many jumps their freighters made, and how often they got ganked.
However, as we all know - there are only a few unavoidable choke-point systems where ganking actually occurs - so freight runs that do not pass through them are irrelevant.
Additionally, the only meaningful statistic for how often ganks occur is how often they are ganked *per entire trip* - not per single gate jump. You can jump 25 gates and then get ganked 1 jump from your final destination - it still makes the entire run a failure due to ganking, even though you technically only got ganked on 4% of the gates you jumped through...
Now, since Red Frog is still in business ignoring ganks, I am quite confident that a proper statistical analysis would still favour baltec's viewpoint....but the fact remains that he wasn't satisfied with a meaningful analysis - he had to ridiculously skew the data in his own favour.
This is the sort of bad practice that gives statistics a bad name. And *this* is why they are *not* in and of themselves "scientific". |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 16:22:26 -
[38] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote: The scientific method is an intentionally difficult, long, and rigorous process to remove discrepancies of this type and to ensure that the results are actually *proven* - not merely indicated by 1 potentially skewed set of uncontrolled observations.
Thankfully we have several. Many times in the past we have looked at the number of freighters getting ganked and found the number to be tiny compared to the amount passing through choke points. Tippia one went through records to see the difference between the rate of mining barges getting ganked back in 2011 and 2015 and found it had dropped. In this thread I have also pointed out why barges are poorly balanced and done it using real numbers. The problem with the anti gankers is not a single argument they have can be backed up with any evidence that supports it, they never provide any evidence even, its always people like me that has to go out and look into these things. We also always see the same responses too. "oh that doesn't count", "they don't represent the norm" but by far the most common response is them ignoring anything that doesn't back up their argument. You have statistics, you have evidence - you do not have a method of scientifically sound, *controlled and repeatable testing* - so you will never progress beyond step 3 of the scientific method. You will never have *PROOF* that would stand up to true scientific review. It would be silly to even try for it - it is a game.
Look as I say I agree with you on this point. I *don't* think it is significantly impacting the game.
I was just offended that shae called it "scientific method" and implied that it was scientifically proven. As I say - it is a pet peeve of mine. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
375
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 17:11:08 -
[39] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Dracvlad wrote:baltec1 wrote:Dracvlad wrote: Where did you get that number from, pull it out of Jenn's megaphone?
Red freight, the largest freight organisation in EVE. Not representative of all haulers mate... If I said the same thing about ganking you would be crawling all over me for it. No it isn't, but even if it is off by an order of magnitude it says ganking is a trivial issue. Even if it is off by 2 orders of magnitude a trivial issue. And it is something that haulers themselves can fix by simply playing prudently. So you still got literally not one scrap of empirical data other than all the whining on the forums by BadsGäó. I'm guessing that due to some issues I addressed earlier the actual number for Red Frog Freight specifically is at around 1% of their runs that get ganked. This is not based on hard data sadly - but it seems like a pretty reasonable estimate for them.
If you wanted more directly meaningful statistics for EVE in general you could park alts in all the choke points and count how many freighters go through, and how many get ganked - but one of the reasons there is so little actual hard data for EVE is that very few people are actually willing to put in any time to collect it - so all of our data comes from *guesses* and *estimates* based on statistics accumulated by external sites for other purposes. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
375
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 17:24:57 -
[40] - Quote
It is a pretty limited sample set - but sure, it is data |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
376
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 17:34:57 -
[41] - Quote
For the record - you guys got me curious enough to go to the Red Frog page and actually calculate the *actual* statistics from Red Frog Freight. My primary assumption here is that a "failed" contract = a gank. It is pretty well established that Red Frog is not a scamming organization and vets their pilots well - so I think this is a reasonably fair assumption:
2011: 54,530 contracts total - 16 failed = 0.0293% 2012: 110,290 contracts total - 194 failed = 0.1759% 2013: 223,414 contracts total - 260 failed = 0.1164% 2014: 235,505 contracts total - 245 failed = 0.1040% 2015: 149,028 contracts total - 382 failed = 0.2563%
Make of them what you will - they are only statistics after all - but THOSE are the actual Red Frog numbers per their annual reports.
edit: Additional note - I used *only* the actual "Red Frog* division's numbers - as they are the high-sec branch. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
378
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 17:49:57 -
[42] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:These are indicative of how likely ganking would be if players stopped being imprudent and foolish, IMO.
It shows, IMO, that Dracvlad and everyone else complaining about freighter ganking have precisely zero on their side of the argument.
As an aside, a failed contract could be due to the nature of the contract--e.g. wanting to move 10 billion or some other factor, so I'd consider these numbers an upper bound on the gank rate for RFF.
I don't believe they count a contract as "failed" unless they accept it - but yes there are other reasons for a failure... Honestly though the numbers are so low I don't think it is statistically significant or worth worrying about.
And I agree they are quite low - and easily reproducible by all haulers if they followed the same practices as Red Frog (their haulers have no super-powers after all).
Honestly though I'd be surprised if even the most careless pilots bring the average up to more than ~1% across all of EVE for freighters.
It would be nice if CCP tracked data for everybody and released some official statistics - server side monitoring is really the only way it could be done at that scale. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
380
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 21:37:01 -
[43] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:I'm guessing that due to some issues I addressed earlier the actual number for Red Frog Freight specifically is at around 1% of their runs that get ganked. This is not based on hard data sadly - but it seems like a pretty reasonable estimate for them. Actually its 0.25% and that includes all failed contracts not just ganked. Your quote broke - and yes, I know, I'm the one who did the math
But yeah, that 1% was purely a guess....that is *why* I went and did the math, I felt bad guessing after my rant earlier. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
380
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 23:01:24 -
[44] - Quote
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
This i size of 200 - 100% of coins land head-side up.
People like you will take this and say that I have proven that any coin flipped will land head-side up 100% of the time...but we all know this is ridiculous. Just because I got bad samples for a single survey and released a misleading statistic, it doesn't make the results true for the rest of the world.
The scientific method is an intentionally difficult, long, and rigorous process to remove discrepancies of this type and to ensure that the results are actually *proven* - not merely indicated by 1 potentially skewed set of uncontrolled observations.
People like me will what? Where did you get that stupid judgement from? As to scientific method, we all of us are people beyond our characters with varied backgrounds and experiences. Mine happens to be with a PhD in Chemistry, so I'm quite comfortable with both my understanding and application of scientific method. Bickering about the level of thinking about the issue isn't an important focus of the discussion overall and doesn't change the original point being made. Perhaps from the way you took a meaningless statistic about # of freighters ganked vs # of jumps for Red Frog and stated that it *proved* something via the scientific method...
As someone with a PhD in Chemistry, you of all people should know that precision of wording matters...and that statistics do not consitute any level of scientific "proof"
You are correct however that it doesn't change the core point being made regarding ganking. It just means that *nobody* has any *proof* one way or another - just a statistical sampling which we believe indicates something about it. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
380
|
Posted - 2016.08.02 23:11:49 -
[45] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Which is obviously the best anyone can do and a helluvalot better than guesstimating some assumption and building upon that. Aye? Lol yes, yes it is |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
382
|
Posted - 2016.08.03 14:47:16 -
[46] - Quote
Lucy Lollipops wrote:Anyway if you go on reddit there is a post where someone analyzes financial situation of eve and it proves that they are losing clients, raising profit cutting costs, everyone says it's not good.
I don't know if I can link reddit posts, maybe not ( and I don't want to be censored), but it proves that they need to carefully think why they are losing players... Traditionally from a business standpoint raising profits and cutting costs are considered good things...
Just throwing it out there... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
385
|
Posted - 2016.08.03 18:30:47 -
[47] - Quote
TBH I think they should just give freighters slots like every other ship. Even the Bowhead has slots - and it is a freighter.
Would also finally allow all of the races of freighters to use their racial bonuses - instead of only the gallente.
Only big balance problem of course is the ****ing amarr and their slave implants + armor....But welcome to EVE? give them less cargo space to counter it, and enough low-slots to get the cargo back if they nerf their armor.
Not going to propose it as an actual change though - because I know nobody would go for that one |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
386
|
Posted - 2016.08.03 19:22:45 -
[48] - Quote
Anyone else starting to feel like the word "content" is losing all meaning or relation to reality just because of how often both sides of this argument like to throw it around these days? |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
386
|
Posted - 2016.08.03 19:56:35 -
[49] - Quote
Gadget Helmsdottir wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Anyone else starting to feel like the word "content" is losing all meaning or relation to reality just because of how often both sides of this argument like to throw it around these days? Actually, I don't think it's losing its meaning. We all assign a different meaning to what "content" is. We might need to decide what content officially is for EvE, or at least come to some agreement. CCP, CSM... make it happen --Gadget Well, I mean....as a word it has meaning...
But I'm not sure anybody throwing it around here really knows the meaning...
On the one hand - obviously everything *in* the game is the literal *content* of the game - and this naturally includes everything done by every player at any time....So it is ridiculous to state that things players do don't "create content"....
But on the other hand....*everything* that *every* player does is the literal content of the game... That doesn't make it *good* content or *meaningful* content. I mean **** the afk miners chewing their asteroids are still "creating content" in a very literal sense...it is just dull, boring, meaningless content... So acting like you are some special snowflake by "creating content" in whatever unique way you do so is equally ridiculous...
It is just a word... A very broad, generic word... It doesn't have the deep meaning that people seem to assign to it...
And over-use is generally bad for any word in this context. People try to replace the actual meaning of the word with their perceived/desired deeper/alternate meaning... And it makes it hard for people not intimately familiar with the ongoing discussion to understand what they are saying (and that is before you even consider that many of the people don't even use English as their primary language)...
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
387
|
Posted - 2016.08.03 20:48:35 -
[50] - Quote
Gadget Helmsdottir wrote:Nah. "Content" is now game jargon. We just need to define this piece of jargon for EvE.
Y'know, like bubbles in EvE have nothing to do with bubblegum.
--Gadget To be fair - bubbles are still literal visible bubbles - even if they aren't made of gum
But yeah, OK, it is EVE jargon....but I wish they would hurry up and agree on a defined meaning
Then again...asking these 2 groups to agree on anything is probably a lost cause
I don't think they could agree on the proper way to fit a shuttle... |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
390
|
Posted - 2016.08.03 22:44:12 -
[51] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:That's because you don't argue with facts and he does. He keeps saying the same thing over and over again because he is right and you are not only wrong but a liar.
baltec1 wrote: Fittings for a gank nado stands at 60 mil, total cost for the ship and fittings is roughly 135 million. Three T1 catalysts will kill it so you are spending 7 million to gank a tornado for potential profit of 60 million.
How about any of the figures he posts actually make sense? Exhibit AExhibit BExhibit CExhibit DExhibit EExhibit FExhibit GThis from ZKill's frontpage. It's between 6-14 mil. If half of that drops you're looking at 3-7 mil in loot. We've had this conversation before: he'll say "it's 12 mil for a Thrasher", I quickly look 'em up on ZKill and what does my leery eye spot? 2.06 mil, of course. That's off by a rather large margin. It does not inspire confidence in any argument he might have -- and by now I don't even know what point he's trying to prove anymore. I'm just debunking false figures for those who might take them at face value and work from there. Whenever numbers get posted and arguments spun on top of those: do take the time to VERIFY THEM people. Seriously. The fully T2 fit thrasher can get up to 12m if you buy it in a hurry instead of shopping around
But when calculating the cost/profit you of course have to consider that the looting alt doesn't even need a suspect flag to loot everything that drops from the ganking ship - so they can, on average, count on getting half of it back.
On average people who gank mining ships at least break even nearly every time - and often make a small profit.
They can also make a rather good profit when they get lucky - it may not be a 20b freighter, but there is some serious loot on some of those afk miners in high sec. And you can still kill them with a single ~10m isk t2 fit catalyst...
Gankers just like to moan and complain almost as much as the anti-gankers do. Both sides want to be the victim. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
391
|
Posted - 2016.08.03 23:41:15 -
[52] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Cherry picked exhibits If you're going to call his numbers out as bad don't ignore all the profitable nados on the same page. On the first page of losses in highsec there are 10+ profitable nados and potentially 10 more if you get lucky on the drops. And yet...oddly enough...Not a single one of them was ganked...
In fact, some of them are *gasp* Suicide Gankers! And...that awesome drop? That is a REFUND for them..
Yeah..boo hoo hoo, getting all that money back, those poor poor babies. We should coddle them and comfort them. I'm sure they are finding it very difficult to go on with their miserable, wretched, horribly difficult lives... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
392
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 00:13:07 -
[53] - Quote
@Teckos: I thought you didn't approve of idiocy? And yet here you are applauding people who have supposedly done the math and determined that they could be getting (by their own numbers) 50 million isk in *pure profit* ganking the hordes of idiots in literally any t2 fit ship other than a mining ship....Yet they are so stupid they choose to gank *the only idiots in EVE* whom they actually lose money ganking...Rather than leaving them to the bumpers (who don't have to spend a single isk on the endeavor - but still prevent them from mining)... Why is this particular brand of idiocy Teckos approved?
@ Loyd: The entire conversation came up because baltec was whining (once again) about how unprofitable ganking mining barges is, and how it is unbalanced compared to any other t2 fit ship. This was a clear attempt to gather pity and, presumably, to convince CCP that they should take pity on the gankers and nerf mining barge hp... Otherwise it would seem to be utterly random and I don't know why you would even be talking about it - let alone defending it so adamantly.
@ Chicken: I don't know what you are typing yet... But it is a pain when the forums eat your post, isn't it |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
392
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 00:15:26 -
[54] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:Hmm, interesting. Let me ask you something. Do you often make completely BS claims about something you clearly know nothing about? In point of fact, no, I don't. I feel qualified to speak on this subject as I have both ganked a few dozen mining ships myself and I've hung around a lot of gankers and seen their kills and loss-mails. I'm also fairly good at math - and the calculations are pretty simple.
Which particular part of my post are you referring to? Are you claiming that a t2 fit thrasher doesn't cost 12 million isk?
Or are you claiming that 400 million isk is not a good profit for a 10 million isk catalyst loss?
Perhaps you are denying that gankers are capable of looting the field? Is it too hard?
Please...elaborate. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
392
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 01:44:01 -
[55] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:@ Loyd: The entire conversation came up because baltec was whining (once again) about how unprofitable ganking mining barges is, and how it is unbalanced compared to any other t2 fit ship. This was a clear attempt to gather pity and, presumably, to convince CCP that they should take pity on the gankers and nerf mining barge hp... Otherwise it would seem to be utterly random and I don't know why you would even be talking about it - let alone defending it so adamantly.
Again, in the context of what I posted, nothing Baltec said is relevant. I was not arguing about that , I was pointing out disingenuous posting after confirming facts. If you can't separate that context from this, you are simply not being objective and the conversation can't possibly be productive. Well then perhaps I mistakenly lumped you in with some others - in which case I apologize.
As I say, I've hung out (in game) with quite a few gankers - and I know most of them do not wish to be seen as victims and are not trying to get pity or anything of the sort.
This makes it all the more annoying however when the vocal minority on the forums continually whines about nerfs and how hard this or that is about ganking in the modern EVE etc... And ultimately Baltec (among others) seems to be posting more and more along those lines lately.
But as I say yes, I shouldn't have lumped you in with them - thus far your posts have not gone that way for the most part.
That being said - I'm not sure this conversation ever had any chance of being productive... 95% of the people talking (on all sides) have their heads shoved so far up their own ***es they can't even read what anybody else is writing anymore. Possibly including myself at times But nobody here is going to convince anybody else to change their current viewpoints...Everyone is just yelling at each other venting frustrations at this point. As usual. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
394
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 10:33:02 -
[56] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I don't require support to prove my point, the dictionary and the rest of the gaming community does that for me.
The eve community overused the word to the point were it has become a slang term for PVP or a general aggressive action. We know what is meant when eve players use the word content but that doesn't mean they are correct. Look...the over-use of the word "content" around here bugs me...but I already linked the dictionary definition of the word "content" a few pages ago in this thread - and explained that your position is also ridiculous. *everything in the game - player made or CCP made - is content*.
It may not be "good" content. It may even be "bad" content. Those are opinions that people can form about the content...but you really can't argue that at its most basic level it *is* content.
You want to compare it to other games? Fine. Lets take one I'm somewhat familiar with and have heard a lot of friends talking about over the past couple of years: League of Legends. Do you know what the #1 response I get from someone when I ask them what they think of the game is? They don't talk about the gameplay, they don't talk about the mechanics...They talk about the *insanely toxic community of ***players*** in the game*. The actions and attitudes of *players* are a very large part of the "content" of most games - particularly when speaking of player experiences in them rather than just writing a box advertisement...
So seriously...just give it up already...it is unquestionably "content". If you think it is "bad" content? Good for you - avoid it as much as you can...but it won't make it leave the game.
Rek Seven wrote:Anyway, we can argue this all day if you like but it's pointless and off topic... Sticking with my original point, i quit the game when i am bored of the content ccp provide not because of the activities the players enable me to participate in. If you limit yourself to the PvE content provided by CCP, you won't be playing EVE long... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
394
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 10:39:08 -
[57] - Quote
And baltec...
Loyd is correct, you do know what you are talking about.
And I don't even disagree with you on *most* topics, at a fundamental level.
But you do get carried away in some of your examples here I've noticed...And you like to exaggerate data to make it lean more heavily the direction you want it to - even when it already supports your point for the most part.
If you nitpick and point out every little flaw in everyone else's examples, analogies, and statistics....You should be prepared for people to return the favour and nitpick exaggerations/mistakes you make in presenting your own data. "Turnabout is fair play" and all that.
Anyway, I'll *try* to stop being so pedantic myself and let you stay "on topic" in so far as that is possible here (given that the thread hasn't been on the OP's topic for a few pages now...)
carry on |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 11:24:42 -
[58] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote: and explained that your position is also ridiculous. *everything in the game - player made or CCP made - is content*. I'll stop you there. I have made it clear that i do not agree with this so it's pointless to continue. I can accept that players want to use a word incorrectly, i'm just pointing out that the word is being used incorrectly. So just accept that. It's like arguing that a swimming pool full of water is actually a swimming pool full of liquid. Technically both are right but the guy who said it is full of water is more right. To continue your own analogy - The key difference here is that *you* have not been arguing that both are technically right. You haven't even been arguing that the swimming pool is full of water. You've been wasting all of your time arguing that the swimming pool is *NOT* full of liquid.
And as you say - the swimming pool *is* full of liquid. There may be better words for it - but the word liquid is *not wrong*...And it is ridiculous for you to keep arguing that it is wrong just because there may be better words to use... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 11:52:16 -
[59] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:[quote=Rek Seven] Basically you heard somebody saying the swimming pool is full of liquid...and you've spent several pages arguing and trying to convince him that "NO no no no no it isn't full of liquid...its full of...um....that other thing....But DEFINITELY NOT LIQUID!!!" So if the pool is full of oil instead of water, you don't think that is an important distinction to make? Your logic is flawed and you miss the point. If there is a specific word for a specific thing then there is no reason to use a general word for that thing and to argue other wise is idiotic. If i want ten oranges and 5 apples, I don't ask my greengrocer for 15 fruit... which is essentially what you are saying i should do. Actually had you read my post a few pages back on the subject you would have noticed that I made the exact point you are now trying to make.
But it isn't the point *you* have been arguing. Re-read your own posts, I don't think you remember what you actually said...Because you've spent the past few pages arguing with the grocer that he doesn't have any fruit - and doing so in front of the orange and apple displays...
If your point was that they were correct, but vague - and that they should use more precise wording...Then you should have said it. Not argued that their word was "wrong".
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 11:59:10 -
[60] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote: If your point was that they were correct, but vague - and that they should use more precise wording...Then you should have said it. Not argued that their word was "wrong".
Like i already did here you mean... Rek Seven wrote:It's strange how eve player think they create content by simply playing the game. Maybe it's just a lack of vocabulary...
Players create actions, activities or opportunities but not content. The only people who great content in EVE are the developers.
For me it is important to make the distinction because I have just cancelled my subscription and was asked to give a reason why - I selected "lack of content". This is not me saying there are not enough players doing things in game, it is me saying "I am bored with what CCP has put in the game".
And now you are back to saying that it is *not* a form of content at all...Make up your mind...
Let me re-translate that for you using your pool analogy:
Quote:It's strange how EVE players think that they can add "liquid" to the pool simply by pouring water into the pool. Maybe it's just a lack of vocabulary.
Players add water, but not liquid! The only people who create liquid in EVE are the developers.
Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? And why people take offense at it?
Seriously...
I mean I get what you *mean* - I really do...but you are using the word "wrong" in the same vague, misleading, and borderline incorrect sense in which the people you are arguing with are using the word "content".... It is quite ironic really...but also kind of annoying. So stop it... |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:15:10 -
[61] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:You really don't get it though and are just picking spinets of what i said to support your argument.
You have started a new argument here by saying it is ok to uses a general word to replace a specific one. That was what the fruit and water analogies were about.
My main point is that playing a game is not game content. End of. See...you keep trying to say that you've been arguing what *I* said a few pages ago...
But you haven't.
*I* said that. *NOT YOU*. You can't just change our sides on this argument when it suits you, declare yourself the winner because *I* was right - and then change back and try to keep your victory... I admit it is a novel debating tactic...but it isn't going to work.
Even here - your *main* point is that the general word *can't* describe the specific word. Water is *NOT* liquid - per you...
I give up, you are an idiot. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:16:26 -
[62] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:You really don't get it though and are just picking spinets of what i said to support your argument. You have started a new argument here by saying it is ok to uses a general word to replace a specific one. That was what the fruit and water analogies were about. My main point is that playing a game is not game content. End of. Dirty Forum Alt wrote: Players swim in water, but do not add water! The only people who add water in EVE are the developers.
Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? And why people take offence at it?
I did sound ridiculous because you misunderstood what i was saying... So i fixed it for you. Swimming in water is not a general word for water.
See? You've completely changed what you were saying now - because you *know* you were wrong, and I was right.
As I said, I'm not changing sides with you - you picked the wrong side, you stay there.
Now shut up. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:32:59 -
[63] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Read the original quote idiot. Swimming is the player action, the water is the content in this analogy.
The act of playing the game is not game content, it is simply interacting with the game content within the designed limits. If you believe otherwise, then i would say you are wrong. Meanwhile, 8 pages ago
I read the original quote. That is why I said you were *not* arguing about using a generic word vs using a specific word - because you clearly weren't.
*I* understand your point. I think you are wrong - because as *I* said 8 pages ago, in the very generic sense of the word "content" is *everything* in the game...
Then *you* turned around and claimed that was what you meant all along - and I pointed out how ridiculous that was...
And now you are mad at me for pointing out that your attempt to reverse your position and steal my position was ridiculous.
I'm following along quite well I think...
You are still an idiot. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
395
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 12:36:45 -
[64] - Quote
Also if you *must* keep arguing this with me - shoot me an eve-mail....we've already derailed this thread too far... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
396
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:18:32 -
[65] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:2 pages of quibbling over the word content. This is why the developers reply more on Reddit, this BS could at least be downvoted there. So you are saying EVE needs to add a down-vote option to the forums, and an option to sort posts by rating?
I would support that. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
396
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:50:56 -
[66] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:The only reason we're even able to break even on the vast majority of ganks is that we are subsidized by the gracious EVE community. You know what...I don't even care anymore.
You win.
I agree - gankers of Galaxy Chicken's calibur are whiny, crybaby idiots who can only operate at all because people hold their hand and give them money/handouts.
CCP should clearly coddle them and change the game in their favour, because they are just too pathetic to make it without this extra help.
Perhaps some station ads? "For 10 million isk a day, you can save a poor, helpless ganker like Galaxy Chicken from going bankrupt due to his own stupidity. Pledge your support today!" |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
396
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 14:53:12 -
[67] - Quote
Alternatively you could just target miners more than a month old who fit t2 modules...
Or scan your targets...
Or just hit the haulers and become rich... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
397
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 15:05:16 -
[68] - Quote
Caco De'mon wrote:Galaxy Chicken wrote:The only reason we're even able to break even on the vast majority of ganks is that we are subsidized by the gracious EVE community.
If I invest 10 mil into a gank, I can expect to recover less than 10mil in loot (my own included) on average. I would totally back that up. The enlightened people of New Eden who support our noble quest are the true heroes for without them, the struggle to bring order our of the chaos would be much harder... Also what seems to be missed is that while breaking even on a gank might be something that happens on average, a percentage of ganks fail and that can really ruin things. But that is out cross to (care)bear. James be praised Well ironically CODE. is pretty new-player friendly in their recruitment - so for CODE. specifically (and not just people in the alliance, I know) I'm sure the average profit for miner ganking does suffer from needing extra ships and the occasional failed gank/etc.
My own experience was more planned out - I did the math before I went in, so of course I made sure I turned a profit =P. I'm not a religious zealot, I just wanted to try out ganking.
My comments were regarding ganking in general - not the CODE. organization specifically - even though I do realize they are the primary ganker of mining ships.
The *primary* point I've been making all along on this issue is that gankers are in the lucky position to *choose* how much they spend and how much they make. The only reason *not* to turn a profit is if profit is not your motive - but that is still your *choice* - not a broken game mechanic at that point.
But if people like Galaxy Chicken want me to pity them - fine, they can have my pity. Just perhaps not for the reasons they want it.... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
401
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 17:20:45 -
[69] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Alternatively you could just target miners more than a month old who fit t2 modules...
Or scan your targets...
Or just hit the haulers and become rich... I'm talking t2 fit, no tank. Again, this isn't complicated maths. A basic t2 fit retriever should drop ~3 million isk in loot (1 strip miner, 1 mining upgrade)
It can be ganked by a 2 million isk t1 fit catalyst in any 0.5 system with concord pre-pulled (using a free rookie ship)
You get 750k of the catalyst cost back - so total cost of the gank is 1.25 million isk.
3.75 million isk loot > 1.25 million isk lost.
Profit.
If you *choose* to gank ships that will not be profitable, by using cost-ineffective ships or targetting ships that are not cost effective to kill - that is still your *choice*....
Deal with it. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
401
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 17:39:07 -
[70] - Quote
It is interesting, looking at prices of modern mining items...
While every other ship type and module type in EVE has been getting more expensive... the mining ships/equipment have actually gone *down* in price pretty noticeably in the past few years.
I wonder if this is an over-reaction by the industrial section of the game trying to compensate for the perception that tons of miners are being ganked - so they are going to need new ships/gear?
I don't have a way to track it, and CCP doesn't care enough, but it would be interesting to find out.
It would be ironic if all the ganking these past few years has actually made it easier for new players to get into mining by indirectly driving down all the prices on the equipment... |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
401
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 19:50:49 -
[71] - Quote
Sarah Flynt wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:While every other ship type and module type in EVE has been getting more expensive... the mining ships/equipment have actually gone *down* in price pretty noticeably in the past few years.
I wonder if this is an over-reaction by the industrial section of the game trying to compensate for the perception that tons of miners are being ganked - so they are going to need new ships/gear? No idea why you got that impression but that is certainly not the case. Care to give concrete examples? The Crius expansion in mid 2014 has turned the industry side of things upside down. Long term price changes of specific items that aren't artificially limited by CCP over the timespan that you're suggesting are never due to player actions. At best player speculation is making the price change slower, but they don't cause it. Applications like e.g. "EVE ISK per hour" or homegrown solutions can tell you exactly what is most profitable to build with a few mouseclicks which results in price spikes (up or down) only lasting a short time depending on the build time of that item. If there are prolonged increases in item prices, it usually affects more than just a select few items as that usually means that one or more of the materials required to build it have gone up in price. The latter one can of course be the result of player actions (see e.g. OTEC/B0TLRD Accords or more recently WWBee and the destroyed moon mining/reactor farms of the CFC). Just an impression...I *had* tried to make that clear in the 2nd half of my post (which you conveniently deleted I notice ).
I don't do industry anymore, and I don't even need to shop all that often (because I literally have so much junk scattered around the universe I can generally find whatever I need just by rummaging for a few minutes and flying 20 jumps) - but in general the things I do buy are more expensive than they used to be. So I was surprised to note that all of the mining ships and mining items are cheaper than they used to be. Like a lot cheaper...
Like strip miners used to be 4 million, now they are 2 million. Retriever used to cost 35-40 million, now it is 25 million.
I know I'm out of touch with the industrial side of EVE - it just seemed odd.
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
401
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 20:21:36 -
[72] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:Look at it this way, by far the largest and most active miner-ganking organization in the game, doesn't do so for profit but rather for ideological reasons. What does that tell you about the profitability of ganking miners? To be fair he puts it right out in the open - the leader of the largest miner-ganking organization in the game *does* do it for profits - and he puts 90% of all isk donated directly into his own pocket (over a trillion isk so far - and that is just what he has publicly reported) and doesn't even do any ganking himself...
But that is probably a discussion for another time/place
Also TBH you may do a lot of ganking, but CODE is more of an RP group than real suicide gankers...I dunno if you qualify as "typical"...
In any case, have fun ganking |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
401
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 20:41:43 -
[73] - Quote
Sarah Flynt wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Like strip miners used to be 4 million, now they are 2 million. Retriever used to cost 35-40 million, now it is 25 million. Where are you gettings these prices from? 2 million? Then you got very lucky as that is far away from their usual price point which hovers between 3.5 and 4 million these days (currently slightly below 3.7 million in Jita). Edit: I suppose you mean T2? TBH I just looked at T1..because not many miners seem to use T2...and I don't think I've ever actually purchased one - just got them as drops from miners...but the in-game estimate said close to 4 million isk...
meh |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
401
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 20:49:37 -
[74] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:real suicide gankers...I dunno if you qualify as "typical"... Huh? What do you think is typical? For gankers? Hauler gankers who do it to make a profit...Or people who do occasional miner/whatever ganks for fun. I realize they are fewer in number - but they've been around since the game began 13 years ago.
CODE. is a relatively new concept in EVE - and isn't even limited to just ganking, that is just one of the tools they use. They seem to be primarily focused on their role-play of "saving high-sec" from the "evil bot-aspirants" - not ganking. I believe even the CODE. members here will agree with me when I say that for CODE. ganking is just a *tool* - not the end goal of their organization... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
405
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 21:52:33 -
[75] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Paranoid Loyd wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:real suicide gankers...I dunno if you qualify as "typical"... Huh? What do you think is typical? For gankers? Hauler gankers who do it to make a profit...Or people who do occasional miner/whatever ganks for fun. I realize they are fewer in number - but they've been around since the game began 13 years ago. CODE. is a relatively new concept in EVE - and isn't even limited to just ganking, that is just one of the tools they use. They seem to be primarily focused on their role-play of "saving high-sec" from the "evil bot-aspirants" - not ganking. I believe even the CODE. members here will agree with me when I say that for CODE. ganking is just a *tool* - not the end goal of their organization... Relatively new or not, should the majority not be considered typical? Ignoring what typical is, what does classifying someone as typical or not typical accomplish? Is one's opinion any less relevant if they are not typical? Relevance should be based on knowledge and experience, not what is typical. I can't speak for everyone but ganking is not the end goal of my organization and I fall into what you would arbitrarily call typical. You could certainly consider them typical due to the number of people...but if we are going to start rating the balance or gankability of ships in terms of CODE.'s motivations... then the typical ganker shouldn't care whether there is any profit in it or not, nor how much tank the ship hull natively has... They have essentially endless isk to throw at their fun ganking - both from their profitable ganking and from numerous donations...So the entire discussion of costs vs profits becomes irrelevant.
But sure, if we use CODE. as a baseline - their average low-level member ganking miners doesn't make a profit from the gank itself - they only make a profit if they manage to sell a "permit". But they don't need to make a profit - because ganking is merely their form of highly aggressive door-to-door salesmanship/evangelism of their cult (again, all in game - role-play as I have said multiple times). |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
405
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 22:23:18 -
[76] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote: I knew if I gave you enough rope, you'd hang yourself.
If you want to discuss ganking profitability in terms of code - the mining ships are irrelevant.
Fine, lets say you lose a couple million isk per mining ship - doesn't matter.
Because then we have to factor in all the *other* ships your alliance ganks. The freighters, the industrials, the missioning ships, etc.
Your average freighter gank seems to drop around, what, 2 billion isk in loot as a save low-ball estimate? Multiply that by 3600 freighters ganked and that gives us an estimated profit of 7.2 trillion isk. Just from freighters - not even including haulers/etc.
Now, lets say you lose 5 million isk per miner you gank - that means you are still making a profit overall for at least 1.44 million miner ganks.
Now, lets assume CODE. is nothing but a scam on its own members (just for the fun of it), and your leadership just puts 90% of that straight into their own pockets - that still leaves you with 144,000 fully paid for miner ganks. Since CODE. has only performed 65,000 kills to date - total, I'd say you are making quite a handsome profit with your ganking.
Q.E.D. - having done the math - The *typical* ganker (hereby defined as CODE.) is making massive profits on average.
edit: And I didn't even include your donations at all, nor the hauler kills, nor any other sources of income. The real profit amount is of course significantly higher. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
405
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 23:24:55 -
[77] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Because then we have to factor in all the *other* ships your alliance ganks. The freighters, the industrials, the missioning ships, etc.
Your average freighter gank seems to drop around, what, 2 billion isk in loot as a safe low-ball estimate? Multiply that by 3600 freighters ganked and that gives us an estimated profit of 7.2 trillion isk. Just from freighters - not even including haulers/etc.
Now, lets say you lose 5 million isk per miner you gank - that means you are still making a profit overall for at least 1.44 million miner ganks. Your math is, as usual, pretty messed up, but before we even get into that, please explain to me how Jason Kusion ganking a freighter somehow results in cash going into my pocket. I'm a miner ganker, that is what we were talking about before you started desperately trying to make this about the Savior of Highsec and whatever else... You act like we have an alliance treasury or something, we don't. We have an SRP fund that is filled through donations. Like I said - the miner gankers in CODE. lose money.
You are the peons.
The amusing slaves upon whose back the empire is built.
I agreed with you on that point already: Yes, miner-ganking as CODE. does it is *not* profitable - and would be considered *stupid* if taken purely on its own without reference to the greater motivations of the CODE. organization.
Since you probably can't understand all those big words, let me simplify it for you:
You = Right.
You = Bad @ Gank for $$$
But You = OK because CODE. = Reasons
Yay You
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
405
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 23:28:59 -
[78] - Quote
And for the record - yes, I am jealous of CODE.
I wish I'd thought of it first...
I mean **** - forget people who afk mine to earn isk for PLEX to play for free.....Arbitrarily declaring myself leader of high sec and recruiting a bunch of easily amused drones to farm isk for me, so that I *don't even have to log in* to earn isk to get PLEX and play for free? That is absolutely brilliant.
James 315 truly is a visionary - at least in the running for the absolute best scammer in EVE history. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
405
|
Posted - 2016.08.04 23:29:47 -
[79] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:Hey thanks bud. It's really classy of you to admit when you lose at forum PVP. gf
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
407
|
Posted - 2016.08.05 00:20:48 -
[80] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:And for the record - yes, I am jealous of CODE.
I wish I'd thought of it first...
I mean **** - forget people who afk mine to earn isk for PLEX to play for free.....Arbitrarily declaring myself leader of high sec and recruiting a bunch of easily amused drones to farm isk for me, so that I *don't even have to log in* to earn isk to get PLEX and play for free? That is absolutely brilliant.
James 315 truly is a visionary - at least in the running for the absolute best scammer in EVE history. That is alot of AFK mining. And PLEX is not playing for free. Sorry, couldn't let that softball go by..... Lol I know - but I keep seeing a lot of the CODE. forum warriors posting it so I couldn't resist |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
413
|
Posted - 2016.08.05 10:47:12 -
[81] - Quote
While the game clearly doesn't "require" 2 accounts - and indeed isn't "meant" to be played with 2 accounts - there are menial tasks that are much easier performed with alts than trying to bug your corp-mates into doing them all the time. Scouting/webbing for a freighter, for example, is fine once in a while - but gets old *really* fast if you get asked to do it all the time and it isn't even your cargo...
Also CCP has been really pushing the dual-account and dual training deals the past few years - so while the game may not "require" or be "meant" to be played with 2 characters, CCP would clearly like everyone to be making alts as often as possible |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
413
|
Posted - 2016.08.05 11:49:18 -
[82] - Quote
Tao Dolcino wrote:I agree with you but i'm not sure that CCP is sharing your point of view : maybe they already have agreed to let EVE Online die, that it won't be anymore their main source of money because it's getting old and because it's not casual and mainstream enough. Maybe they are chasing a new illusion with their "Virtual Reality" games. Well, i find the word very adapted to what's happening here. CCP is living in a virtual reality. Actually there was a link posted (by one of the "oh noes EVE is dying people in this thread) a while back - I'm too lazy to go back and pull it up - but it said that even though the total number of subscribers in EVE is down, their costs are also down, and their profits are *up*.
So quite simply this would indicate (to me) that CCP has decided to start making *money* their bottom line. They are finally running EVE like a large business rather than like a niche game/pet project/fun hobby...
Whether they are doing this to fund other projects or merely to line their own pockets is really irrelevant - the point is they are doing whatever they can to increase their profits from EVE at this point.
Many have argued whether this is sustainable or not...But based on other games that have made this transition (runescape for example)...there will be a rough patch here as the user-base transitions - but if they can survive the transition (and they seem to be doing pretty well so far all things considered, though the transition is far from completed yet) they will be in a position to set new record highs in profit.
So to summarize: EVE is changing, but certainly not dying. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
413
|
Posted - 2016.08.05 11:57:53 -
[83] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:And for the record - yes, I am jealous of CODE.
I wish I'd thought of it first...
I mean **** - forget people who afk mine to earn isk for PLEX to play for free.....Arbitrarily declaring myself leader of high sec and recruiting a bunch of easily amused drones to farm isk for me, so that I *don't even have to log in* to earn isk to get PLEX and play for free? That is absolutely brilliant.
James 315 truly is a visionary - at least in the running for the absolute best scammer in EVE history. You seem to be confused friend, you see, James 315 sends me money. I spend a little money on my dog too. For food, even toys occasionally.
I like it to stay alive. Much more entertaining that way.
Dead puppies aren't much fun. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
413
|
Posted - 2016.08.05 12:53:56 -
[84] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Don't worry, I've already called the Icelandic Coast Guard about this situation. Black Helicopters are on the way as we speak. Good. We don't want this trend to spread - best to wipe it out at the source. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
427
|
Posted - 2016.08.05 21:12:55 -
[85] - Quote
I wouldn't take it personally - we are 56 pages into the thread here and tensions are a bit high - also a large part of the recent conversation has been about precise language/statistics. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
446
|
Posted - 2016.08.06 21:12:06 -
[86] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Me too, the frozen corpse is great but its somewhat ...cold. Throw it in the microwave? |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
454
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 12:32:11 -
[87] - Quote
How about a 20,000 page instruction manual on every single thing you can do in EVE?
TBH they had a short tutorial when I started... Just enough to get you to the rookie career agents... i think I made it as far as step 2 before I closed it and went off to figure things out on my own... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
456
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 15:17:07 -
[88] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Imagine a conference.
Just because you're sitting at the table silently ... ... doesn't mean you're actively influencing in a discussion.
Saying "i was part of the discussion" in this example would be completely misleading and wrong. While I don't actually disagree - just to play devil's advocate here I'll point out a flaw in your argument:
Depending on the type of conference, you may be expected to sit quietly and pay attention to 1-2 people making a presentation - and if you have nothing to add to their proposals other than support, there is no need to say anything - it would just be wasting everyone's time.
In this case, you are still "part of the discussion" - and in an meaningful way. You supported the proposition, even though you didn't have to say anything.
Of course you could also be at the very same conference and fall asleep quietly...In which case of course you *did not* participate in the discussion in a meaningful way...
The fun part is that to an outside observer it is pretty much impossible to tell the difference unless the sleeper does something obvious like falling out of their chair.
Bringing it back to EVE - AFK players are almost indistinguishable from non-AFK players in many activities, such as mining and even missioning sometimes. And of course they get angry when they get lumped into the wrong group just because to an outside observer it *looked like* they were AFK.
Also in the end it doesn't make much meaningful difference to their contribution to the game...even though in the case of the non-afk engaged player they have the *opportunity* to speak up and change something...if they don't take it the end result is much the same. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
456
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 16:00:48 -
[89] - Quote
Lucy Lollipops wrote:May I ask you this?
Do you really think that i.e. a player that decides to mine ores for the next 4 hours will stay in front of his pc for four hours pressing dscan and checking local while mining in hisec?
Do your really think mentally sane game developers think this mining mechanic is correctly played in front of pc all time?
Because giving my honest opinion there is a incredible level of duplicity ( hypochrisy ) in all of this discussion if we are discussing of mining for hours looking your ship still in the middle of the screen while pressing dscan and so on...
Personally I don't care if they go AFK. I've afk mined myself - I also used to afk haul, even while CODE. was at its most active. There are other precautions you can take to avoid being ganked...
Also pressing d-scan or checking local don't have to be done *constantly* - and can easily be relegated to a 2nd monitor as long as you do something at the physical computer itself...
However many miners *don't* go afk - they talk to corp-mates, socialize, etc. They actually interact with the EVE universe even as they mine for 4 hours...they just do it in a way that an outside observer can't see. That is all i was saying in my post.
For many people EVE just becomes a chat room, often for weeks at a time. I've logged in for entires days/weeks and never bothered to undock - but I was still "active" in my own way... EVE is strange that way. Though of course if that is *all* you do sooner or later you'll rethink paying so much money every month to do it. Thus many such people mine to buy plex, to fund their chat room. The ones who do it intelligently don't even get ganked in the process. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
456
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 16:12:28 -
[90] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:And don't forget that a miner who talks to others while mining is actually contributing to the game. Communication influences society. It's still better than pure silence.
I agree, just pointing out that to most of us there is no visible difference - and many of the miners/afkers that get complained about on the forums actually fall into this category.
It is a dull role, but they do have an 'active' niche role in EVE... In their own way. |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
460
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 17:42:07 -
[91] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:
However many miners *don't* go afk - they talk to corp-mates, socialize, etc. They actually interact with the EVE universe even as they mine for 4 hours...they just do it in a way that an outside observer can't see. That is all i was saying in my post.
For many people EVE just becomes a chat room, often for weeks at a time. I've logged in for entires days/weeks and never bothered to undock - but I was still "active" in my own way... EVE is strange that way. Though of course if that is *all* you do sooner or later you'll rethink paying so much money every month to do it. Thus many such people mine to buy plex, to fund their chat room. The ones who do it intelligently don't even get ganked in the process.
the smartest miners don't use d, they only need to overview to be visible while moving anyway. I'm not seeing how your points matter to what i was saying. Maybe you just want to add things? I mean, i don't recognize them as arguments against or for something. You say non-afk miners aren't afk. That's true! I was only talking about afk people, not non-afk people. Anyone who isn't afk ... isn't afk ... and it'll show one way or another. It doesn't matter if observers perceive him as afk or not ... ... and once observers turn into influencers, it'll be revealed anyway. A chatting miner isn't afk and he's influencing society actively. There's a difference between participating and actively influencing. I'm trying to communicate that we as a society need to move away from some wrong beliefs that hinder us as a whole. They stop us from evolving our culture and cause long term negative effects. Being afk by definition means "not playing" and all arguments people bring up FOR afk play are nonsense ... ... because you can not ever play a game by not playing it. Being logged in doesn't mean you're playing. (The only true exception being the afk cloaker, tbhl because he manages to influence society massively simply through psychological effects. A fascinating exception, if you think about it) hope i got that right, i'm a bit in a hurry. TBH those particular comments were in reply to Lucy, not your post
But you are correct, I'm not actually disagreeing with *you*.
Just pointing out some things to the other people reading along here, to make them realize that even though *all* of the miners *seem* afk - many of them really aren't - some of them really *are* playing - even if they are indistinguishable from the bots surrounding them to most of the PvP players attempting to interact with them. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
460
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 18:29:19 -
[92] - Quote
Sure....we could redesign the entire PvE side of the game from the ground up...but 13+ years in I don't think it is very likely...
And one can hardly blame the players for playing the game as it exists...If they enjoy it, for whatever reason... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
460
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 18:40:23 -
[93] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Also, I indeed foresee botters really getting belly ache if CCP made those relatively small changes (after all it's 2 timers!!). Everybody *human* else who want to play and have fun, are going to get an interactive minigame after 13 years. 13 years of a feature sucking, does not justify keeping it sucking. Or does it? I imagine it depends how many people are using mining as a way to pay for "Chat Room Online" to keep in touch with their friends - since making it an active mini-game (particularly one that required friends being physically there with you) would drive all such players out of mining, and possibly out of the game if they weren't willing to start paying subscription fees... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
460
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 19:08:38 -
[94] - Quote
Chronos Thiesant wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Also, I indeed foresee botters really getting belly ache if CCP made those relatively small changes (after all it's 2 timers!!). Everybody *human* else who want to play and have fun, are going to get an interactive minigame after 13 years. 13 years of a feature sucking, does not justify keeping it sucking. Or does it? I imagine it depends how many people are using mining as a way to pay for "Chat Room Online" to keep in touch with their friends - since making it an active mini-game (particularly one that required friends being physically there with you) would drive all such players out of mining, and possibly out of the game if they weren't willing to start paying subscription fees... Maybe they could switch from mining to PI for their chat room online fix? They are about as active as each other. PI is quite a bit harder to set up *and* to keep running if you want to PLEX with that as your sole source of income...
edit: I mean even in the EVE universe people figure out how to mine an asteroid within their first hour or so generally....
I *still* don't know how to "properly" set up a PI network - as I quit bothering to care when they deleted all my planets from the original PI release and re-released it in a much more complicated and annoying format... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
460
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 19:38:47 -
[95] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:There are both websites and apps providing step by step instructions about how to setup the various extraction / production combos and how to layout them for best efficiency vs power employed. And if I wanted to spend a few *hours* setting up a PI network *and then* a few more *hours* every week hauling expensive PI materials through whatever hostile space I chose to set it up in to get a decent return *and* I found or conquered a friendly POCO (or at least one with a reasonable tax rate), maybe I'd bother to look at them...
And if that is *your* thing - then more power to you...
But uh...For me? No thanks...I'll stick to blowing up idiots and looting the PI goods from their wreckage for myself, personally...
And most high-sec miners choose that profession because it is simple and uncomplicated - so I doubt it is a viable career choice for the majority of them as well... The ones who *are* interested in doing PI *already do it* - in addition to their mining.... So taking away one of their sources of income and telling them to just make it up using the other one? Doesn't help them... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
463
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 20:28:38 -
[96] - Quote
Realistically back when I did (on a limited scale) market trades/hauling on a scale large enough to need a freighter, my tactics were even simpler than that:
#1) Fit a tank - duh #2) Don't *ridiculously* over-load the freighter to the point that people are going to make a special effort to kill you #3) *IF* possible, avoid uedama/niarja - if not, oh well #4) Pick a non-peak-ganking time *********************THIS ONE IS THE BIGGY******************************* #5) Autopilot #6) Go AFK, do whatever #7) Unload/sell the cargo in a few hours when it arrives #8) Profit
I know it is a lot of steps - but you will notice that most of them aren't actually actions, just specific *lack* of doing stupid things
Also if you have a very high value but small volume cargo - there are some ridiculously over-tanked ships in this game for that sort of hauling as well - I have no idea why anybody hauls *blueprints* (among other small valuable things) in shuttles or industrials.... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
470
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 13:10:59 -
[97] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Geronimo McVain wrote:The problem with mining is that you have nothing to do and more important nothing important to do. The element of danger is missing completely and so you don't have to pay attention=boredom
I propose asteroid collisions cause damage, and the miner needs to steer his vessel through like an old game of Asteroids (or Galactix)! It'll be fun I promise Forget asteroid collisions - all collisions should cause damage. Lets get some *realism* into this game!!!
It could be based on mass/speed/etc - so a rookie ship would barely scratch your paint, a battleship would flatten you. And either way Concord could show up to decide who is at fault and issue the appropriate citations in high sec, to keep people there happy... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
470
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 14:01:42 -
[98] - Quote
Geronimo McVain wrote:Without the element of danger there is no thrill. This may come as a shock to you...but people don't get into mining in EVE because they are thrill-seeking... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
472
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 16:22:30 -
[99] - Quote
Ceres Starshine wrote:I wanted a fresh start buying the 5 month offered package. I find my carrier in a hostile station. Gm refused to move it to low sec. As i have no friends playing I opened my second account to get aout of there. At the end I kinda frustrated and quit for good... Ah sov space...
This is where you just sneak into the region in an interceptor and put it up for *sale* - then spam their populated systems with the contract until someone buys it.
Then go re-buy it elsewhere.
Annoying? Yep. Going to lose a bit of money? Yep. But that has been the fire-sale tradition in sov space forever As for the petition - working as intended. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
475
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 18:09:10 -
[100] - Quote
Why should every EVE player have to be a thrill-seeker or adrenaline junkie?
Socialites who mine to pay for "Chat Room Online" aren't hurting anybody - they are making at least a small contribution to the game (arguably more in keeping others interested than in the minerals they provide, but whatever)... Why try to force them out of the game?
Similarly the hard-core miners...what is wrong with them? These are the sorts of players who enjoy playing Minecraft without using any cheat-codes or modifications to make the game easier (they might mod it to make it harder). The sort who will actually excavate and mine until they *find* 10,000 diamonds to build a palace out of - just because they enjoy the process. Why should these players not have a place in EVE?
Even the AFK miners aren't *hurting* the game significantly...even if they don't add anything to it...
The only miners who are any kind of a problem are bots...and CCP has taken steps to minimize their impact as well. I would argue that botting carrier-ratters in 0.0 have a far greater impact in the modern EVE than botting miners do...and even that is fairly nonexistent for the most part.
If you want thrills and adventure and content...Then get out there and do the things that provide that. There is no reason mining has to be one of them...
As for your "Only Combat Ships" proposal, because "It's a PVP Game!"...I have a few things to say.....
#1) This is an odd sentiment for, if I recall correctly, an anti-ganker?
#2) Yes, in terms of PvP *Combat* content, the miners are sheep. However, most *good* miners who stick with EVE (and there are a surprisingly large number) find ways to deal with Combat players without unduly disrupting their mining operations. This is all part of the game - and I see no reason to punish them or remove their play-style just because they aren't dealing with Combat in the way you wish they would... Some people can't handle it, and they will quit - as long as they are the minority and/or they get replaced by new recruits, the game won't even notice. When that balance is upset - THAT is when CCP acts to change the game...but not to chase the rest of the miners out of the game - they only act to try to bring more players in, whatever form they may take.
#3) PvP DOES NOT ONLY MEAN COMBAT!!!
Seriously, get it through your thick skulls. PvP can take many forms - they do NOT all require weaponry or open combat. EVE is 100% a PvP game - *NOT* 100% a Combat game. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.
Trust me, an active miner who collects a ton of ore and then speed-sells it at a rock-bottom price that crashes an entire market sector will draw far more tears than any PvP player killing a miner...Even if he never hears the crying/whining directly.
**** - even just mining out an ice belt before the other miners get a chance to get any will net you a boat-load of tears. PvP takes *many* forms. |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
476
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 18:20:27 -
[101] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:That is what I had to do. Couldn't get my carrier out before our systems fell. I did have a JC in the station though, so I JC'd there, put the stuff up on contracts and posted the contracts in local at a very nice price. The people living in our old space got a carrier, I got a nice load of ISK...so everyone is happy.
Oh, and not the first time I had to fire sale stuff. I mentioned that in local chatting with the guys there and the response was, "Yeah, we've all been there."
So confirming Dirty's statements... Oh I speak from experience on this point lol. Not a carrier - but we had a WH connection direct to a market hub (ok 3 jumps out) for a while and I severely overstocked my first sov-space home...
Took me years to firesale it all off, as I wasn't willing to settle for heavy isk losses.
Lol |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
477
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 19:10:51 -
[102] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Ceres Starshine wrote:I wanted a fresh start buying the 5 month offered package. I find my carrier in a hostile station. Gm refused to move it to low sec. As i have no friends playing I opened my second account to get aout of there. At the end I kinda frustrated and quit for good... hard to believe. when you unsub and get stuck at a hostile station after returning ... ... GMs usually move you with at least one ship and everything you can put into it. assuming no alts used in that time, of course. GMs will only move you + 1 ship if *you* are stuck in the station, though it very rarely comes up since your medical clone usually gets moved elsewhere anyway...
I believe Ceres only had a *carrier* stuck in the station - not himself....though it could also be that the carrier has a jump drive so they didn't feel it was necessary...
In any case, fire-sales are always an option. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
478
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 19:30:23 -
[103] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I stopped reading Yeah, I got that...you clearly didn't read a word I wrote...I presume because you don't know how. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
481
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 20:39:43 -
[104] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I stopped reading Yeah, I got that...you clearly didn't read a word I wrote...I presume because you don't know how. edit: So just for the official record - Per Herzog Wolfhammer: Anti-Gankers think all non-combat pilots should be forcibly removed from the game. And I'm bad because I disagree? I'm flattered that you think my opinions on how I would have made this game (entirely a fantasy) is the opinion of AG. If you will excuse, I must go put on my hoody and issue some orders to AG.... There are others in AG whose ideas and opinions on various matters would be closer to the pulse of AG generally. But until you figure that out, I'll bask in the power you presume I have. Now scurry away quickly, peasant. No, I don't think you have any significance - but you *have* claimed to be an anti-ganker...and acted as if you thought your view was one commonly held by the rest...
Regardless of the official anti-ganker stance however - you *do* confirm that is your personal opinion?
Even CODE. doesn't say that CCP should just step in and forcibly remove all non-combat play-styles from the game...They just rely on limited in-game mechanics to encourage more active play and less mining...
Literally, you are harsher towards miners than CODE.
Think about that...
Also any CODE. members who are still reading this thread - good material for a future minerbumping entry here perhaps - we all know how much James loves his propaganda |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
481
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 20:56:48 -
[105] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:I think you will find that Herzog has gathered rather a large amount of ganker tears by some quite fun, while it lasted of course freighter wreck ganks... They are quite welcome to talk about his exploits if they wish, but somehow I doubt it.
Herzog is not a leader in the AG and neither am I for that matter.
He is not being harsh about miners, he is suggesting a more interesting game play in terms of mining, so you don't have to sit there in a non-combat ship with a bulls eye painted on your noggin... Whatever he has done against gankers is irrelevant...
He is not proposing making more interesting gameplay in terms of mining - he is proposing literally kicking very nearly every current miner out of the game by completely destroying their play-style - and 100% requiring them to perform combat.
He recommended replacing *all* PvE activities like mining with NPC bots - so that at best they could play some weird RTS-ified version of PvE....And they would 100% have to fly combat ships and defend their convoys in the process.
He also refused to even *read* my point that PvP is not equivalent to "Combat" - he thinks EVE should become 100% Player Vs Player Combat - with no other options for any players.
You see, I *did* read his post - even though he couldn't be ****ing bothered to read mine.
Herzog is WAY worse than CODE. will ever be. He doesn't even think miners should be allowed to *exist* - and he thinks CCP should have taken steps to prevent them from ever playing in the first place.
And when given a chance to re-phrase or back down - he instead chose to double down on his position and resort to personal attacks on me, because I *dared* to say that maybe miners should be allowed to keep on mining... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
483
|
Posted - 2016.08.09 23:52:29 -
[106] - Quote
See Herzog...there are a few problems with that:
- To begin, let me *once again* point out that PvP *is not limited to Combat*. Stop acting like this is the only form of PvP. It isn't... - Most *successful* miners *do not consider themselves victims*. They have lots of options to avoid unwanted combat...And they use them. - Many non-Combat pilots (miners and others) enjoy the non-combat PvP aspects of EVE. Just because you keep pretending this side of the game doesn't exist doesn't make it true...So your brilliant idea of removing this entire side of EVE deprives these players of most of the content they enjoy...
I fail to see how simply *removing* the majority of the content of the game and forcing everyone to play your narrow vision of "FPS Space Combat Online" improves the game in any way... There are other games that already do that - go play one.
Additionally, if we *were* going to go back in time and arbitrarily remove every single play-style of EVE other than the one that 1 single person finds fun....Why would we go with *your* play style? Why not force everybody to mine gas in wormholes and never interact with another human being? This solution *also* removes your predator/victim problem...so why is it not the ideal solution?
Rather than space-bullying - you simply feel that you can declare that every single play-style in the game that isn't *yours" is "wrong" - and should never have been included as an option... If you can't see how much that makes you sound like a pretentious ***....Then you are hopeless.
And seriously - I'm not comparing you to CODE. just because you hate them. Think about it - what is it that people hate about CODE.? It is the fact that they try to force their vision of how the game should be on other people, who don't want to play that way. They are held up as the epitome of this type of arrogant elitism - and hated for it by most people who encounter them regularly...
But you have literally 1-upped CODE. on this one. You aren't even content to use in-game mechanics to try to force people to play your way - you just declare that life would be better if CCP had set up the mechanics so your play style was the only play style. I chose this comparison very specifically - because this is the group you are most like, and more extreme than... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
486
|
Posted - 2016.08.10 18:58:56 -
[107] - Quote
Galaxy Chicken wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote: Socialites who mine to pay for "Chat Room Online" aren't hurting anybody...
Exactly! They aren't hurting anybody!I don't know about you, but I simply cannot abide that. Well neither can Herzog - you 2 should get together and form a club. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
486
|
Posted - 2016.08.10 19:19:20 -
[108] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Still failing to understand me I see.
It's Ok. Not everybody has the power to understand things well. This is why I hate democracy too. We can only read the words you write down - which were pretty explicit: Combat Combat Combat - everybody who doesn't do combat? Replace them with NPCs. The game shouldn't have them - they are victims and they set a bad example.
I defy you to point to anything you have written in this discussion that disagrees with my analysis of your views. Please note, you've already been quoted - so editing your old posts does not count. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
486
|
Posted - 2016.08.10 20:53:29 -
[109] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I will wait for you to deploy some reading comprehension skills and point out where I said that existing miners and haulers need to be removed from the existing Eve Online game. OK then:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Why should every EVE player have to be a thrill-seeker or adrenaline junkie?
Socialites who mine to pay for "Chat Room Online" aren't hurting anybody - they are making at least a small contribution to the game (arguably more in keeping others interested than in the minerals they provide, but whatever)... Why try to force them out of the game?
Similarly the hard-core miners...what is wrong with them? These are the sorts of players who enjoy playing Minecraft without using any cheat-codes or modifications to make the game easier (they might mod it to make it harder). The sort who will actually excavate and mine until they *find* 10,000 diamonds to build a palace out of - just because they enjoy the process. Why should these players not have a place in EVE?
Even the AFK miners aren't *hurting* the game significantly...even if they don't add anything to it...
The only miners who are any kind of a problem are bots...and CCP has taken steps to minimize their impact as well. I would argue that botting carrier-ratters in 0.0 have a far greater impact in the modern EVE than botting miners do...and even that is fairly nonexistent for the most part.
If you want thrills and adventure and content...Then get out there and do the things that provide that. There is no reason mining has to be one of them...
As for your "Only Combat Ships" proposal, because "It's a PVP Game!"...I have a few things to say.....
#1) This is an odd sentiment for, if I recall correctly, an anti-ganker?
#2) Yes, in terms of PvP *Combat* content, the miners are sheep. However, most *good* miners who stick with EVE (and there are a surprisingly large number) find ways to deal with Combat players without unduly disrupting their mining operations. This is all part of the game - and I see no reason to punish them or remove their play-style just because they aren't dealing with Combat in the way you wish they would... Some people can't handle it, and they will quit - as long as they are the minority and/or they get replaced by new recruits, the game won't even notice. When that balance is upset - THAT is when CCP acts to change the game...but not to chase the rest of the miners out of the game - they only act to try to bring more players in, whatever form they may take.
#3) PvP DOES NOT ONLY MEAN COMBAT!!!
Seriously, get it through your thick skulls. PvP can take many forms - they do NOT all require weaponry or open combat. EVE is 100% a PvP game - *NOT* 100% a Combat game. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.
Trust me, an active miner who collects a ton of ore and then speed-sells it at a rock-bottom price that crashes an entire market sector will draw far more tears than any PvP player killing a miner...Even if he never hears the crying/whining directly.
**** - even just mining out an ice belt before the other miners get a chance to get any will net you a boat-load of tears. PvP takes *many* forms. I had a friend like you some years ago. We called him "Conan the Contrarian". Unlike the Barbarian counterpart he needed to hit the gym. I stopped reading when you showed your assumption that anti-ganking means anti-PVP. That display of ignorance is all I needed to know about the value of your opinions. There you go. I posted a nice long post not even directly attacking you, merely pointing out that mining and other non-combat forms of playing EVE are a valid part of the game - and that I feel it is important for people to have the option to participate in them.
And your reply was that my opinion was worthless because I found your proposal to remove them all from the game strange, and you refused to read my points beyond that.
From this I naturally concluded that you *disagreed* with my point that mining and other non-combat play-styles are a valid way to play EVE.
If that was your way of saying I was right - then I'm sorry, but we are not speaking the same language...
edit: Additionally since that post you have been attacking me repeatedly, very strongly implying that you *disagreed* with me that miners and other non-combatants should be allowed to play EVE...
You may not have explicitly stated it, but you made it pretty clear that I was a horrible person for daring to suggest they have a place in the game, and I believe I drew the logical conclusion from your angry ranting. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
487
|
Posted - 2016.08.10 20:58:37 -
[110] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:But possibly you have played in the "hurr durr I'm a PVPer and people want me nerfed" mindset so long that your filter is clogged and you will, like many of your ilk, always be combative so when a concept is fielded that does not comprise a threat, you still take it as a threat. Additionally your reasoning for calling me a "hurr durr PvPer" is that I defended the right of people to play EVE without directly participating in ship to ship combat if that is their desire?
But you are *not* a "hurr durr PvPer" because...you want to *force* everybody into ship-to-ship Combat whether they like it or not?
Seriously...do you know how to read or perform any rational thought *at all*? |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
488
|
Posted - 2016.08.11 10:48:43 -
[111] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:In a full on display of why there are less people playing Eve, you double down on your accusation without proving or even attempting to prove it. I asked you to show me proof that I was going to change the existing game of Eve and "force" people to do things.
You cannot, because I never said anybody should be "forced" to do anything. That's the job of the gankers, acolytes of Church of HTFU, and their cohorts in Iceland.
You are wrong and will continue to be wrong until you can admit you were wrong. Good thing I didn't hold my breath. I can ignore you now, but I will worry about your type of mindset and what it can (and has) done IRL while hiding in a voting booth. Very well, lets stop with drawing logical conclusions and just summarize what you have literally said then:
- No, Herzog Wolfhammer never said we should kick players out of the game explicitly.
- No, he does not have the power to change a single thing at all.
- Yes, Herzog Wolfhammer said that if *he* had been in charge of creating the game, he would never have included any non-combat play-styles, and would have replaced them all with bots (thus preventing any non-combat players from being able to play the game in the first place) - Proof Here
- Herzog Wolfhammer was also deeply offended by my general follow up post which simply stated that non-combat players play a valuable part in the game - and was upset that I disagreed with his vision of a perfect 100% combat EVE as it would prevent these players from ever having played. Proof Here
- When asked to clarify his position, Herzog Wolfhammer *avoided the question* - and resorted to insults and trolling. Proof Here
- Herzog Wolfhammer re-affirms his position that his vision of a game *without any non-combat players* would be the ideal one - once again implying that these players do not have value - Proof Here
- Herzog Wolfhammer suddenly starts claiming that I don't understand him, and rather than dealing with his repeated rants that the game would have been better without miners, haulers, or any other non-combat players (see previous proofs) - he focuses exclusively on the fact that he never said he was going to change the game itself... While this is technically true - it is only because as you lamented yourself in several of the posts linked above - you *lack the power to do so*.
Now: Stop being a ****ing troll for 2 seconds and give us an honest answer. Do you or do you not stand by your assertions (linked above) that the game would be better if it had been designed as a 100% Combat game and if all non-Combat play-styles had been replaced by NPCs right from the beginning - because *PER YOUR OWN POSTS* non-combat players have no value beyond providing victims for the Combat players to torment. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
489
|
Posted - 2016.08.11 11:34:38 -
[112] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:This is why I hate democracy too.
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I will worry about your type of mindset and what it can (and has) done IRL while hiding in a voting booth. Also just a friendly warning from a fellow forum resident...Real Life Politics are explicitly banned from discussion on the EVE Online forums - so you may want to avoid the real-life insinuations and political references...
Unless of course you want the ISDs to simply delete all of your posts and leave only my replies... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
489
|
Posted - 2016.08.11 11:47:16 -
[113] - Quote
William Legrand-Marx wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:This is why I hate democracy too. Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I will worry about your type of mindset and what it can (and has) done IRL while hiding in a voting booth. Also just a friendly warning from a fellow forum resident...Real Life Politics are explicitly banned from discussion on the EVE Online forums - so you may want to avoid the real-life insinuations and political references... Unless of course you want the ISDs to simply delete all of your posts and leave only my replies... I thought democracy is part of New Eden. Ah, must be delusions... I haven't seen any voting booths in EVE to date...
But I'm not even saying he has crossed any lines yet - just that he is skirting dangerously close to them, and if he keeps going he *will* get there.
As I say - a warning. Pre-emptively. *Before* he gets himself in trouble. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
489
|
Posted - 2016.08.11 12:56:37 -
[114] - Quote
Well as Brokk (among others) has been pointing out all along: EVE is a lot more than just high-sec...Despite the way all conversations on the forums tend to get sucked into high-sec-only discussion. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
489
|
Posted - 2016.08.11 13:17:15 -
[115] - Quote
To be fair - in most notable examples that have been cited the casual players being driven out of the game are actually "older" (in game) and have more sp/isk than the majority of the people driving them out...
The problems with EVE are far more plentiful than the solutions - and I think pointing to any 1 thing as "the" problem is short-sighted and foolish.
However, as far as the large blobs dominating everything - it is just the natural culmination of the blob-mentality that has dominated everything from the beginning. What is the #1 most given piece of advice given to anybody having a problem in EVE? Get friends. Join a group. *Blob it*.
In that sense - perhaps we simply hit critical mass in 2013-ish when we had our peak number of players online - and enough people finally listened to this advice and joined the large blobbing groups to push them over the threshold of what was sustainable in EVE. *If* this is the case - then the initial player bleed would have been from the "victim" populations (aka: anybody who can't field the biggest blob) - with a follow-up loss of players more recently of the blobbers themselves realizing there is nothing left to do now that they are the sole dominant force in their segment of the galaxy.
One can argue the specifics, and of course potential solutions to this... CCP is certainly starting to push anti-blob mechanics such as DPS limits on structures... But whether any of them will work is of course pure speculation. As is calling this "the biggest problem" in EVE - since again, it is just one of many... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
491
|
Posted - 2016.08.11 15:40:08 -
[116] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:DPS limits on structures aren't an anti blob mechanic. They are just a timer. The blob still affects the defence fleet attempts to save the structure. To introduce true anti blob mechanics you would need DPS limits on ships (Something I'm totally keen to see). And the same as structures they would need to be a purely numeric hard cap on damage because all the other methods are too easy to abuse. Fluff lore is easy to write to justify it.
Then the F1 blob is suddenly highly inefficient, and will be cut apart by a well run fleet half it's size no problem. Obviously a well run large fleet is still going to be king of the hill, but at that point it's not just a matter of blobbing, but of extreme skill and co-ordination abilities to run that large a fleet that well. (Statement made assuming CCP set it so that 10 normal ships of any given size roughly reach the DPS cap when shooting another ship of the same size)
The question of 'critical mass' or 'predator over population' I think is a good one to consider. And quite possibly an accurate call, though peak number of players and peak number of players in the large coalitions probably don't match up perfectly, and it's the ratio of players to players in blobs that dictates the magnitude of the issue. CCP are the only ones who could even try to answer this though since it needs active subs information, not simply daily concurrent logins. I believe CCP views them as an anti-blob measure. I'll grant you though they are not an effective one. They are still very early in this process - keep an eye on upcoming updates to see how well they do moving forward. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
491
|
Posted - 2016.08.11 15:51:36 -
[117] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:There need not be an anti-blob measure; it is normal the guys with the manpower win. But it is entirely possible to win uphill fights due to piloting skill. All is well in New Eden. Well yes and no...beyond a certain point no amount of piloting skill is going to save you... And I've noticed more and more Sov-Space fights end without a shot being fired: Both sides form up, the smaller fleet stands down without undocking, the larger fleet grinds whatever timer they are working on, and life goes on without a ship being lost. Not 100% of the time of course - but it does happen disturbingly often.
But in general principle I agree that anti-blob measures are not needed - it is a self correcting issue, and the game will find its own balance.
However from Entosis-based sov to the DPS limitations on Citadels/etc... I do believe that *CCP* has decided anti-blob measures are needed - and will be releasing more of them. What the consequences will be? Well...we won't know until they implement them.... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
491
|
Posted - 2016.08.11 17:21:52 -
[118] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:I'm sure my good friend Dirty Forum Alt will now accuse me of wanting to force brainless F1 fleet monkeys and gate campers out of the game. Actually although I think there are some flaws with it (to be expected in the initial proposal of any system), I think this one is actually an interesting proposal that wouldn't remove any play styles from the game.
I'd be happy to have a discussion about refining it to actually work if you were interested...
But you are clearly just trolling (again) - so I think I won't waste my time even trying. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
498
|
Posted - 2016.08.12 13:01:20 -
[119] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:baltec1 wrote:Captain Tardbar wrote:Simple answer. The player base is made up of a majority of sociopaths. And I suppose you think the people who play battlefield are pro mass shootings too Why would he think that? Though in my opinion a lot of the people who gank could be the type of players habitually using cheat mods that enable them to see and shoot through walls and rubbish like that. On another note I hope that some of them got caught by the Overwatch ban hammer which was absolutely beautiful to see, to see the poor souls buy the game again and still be banned was hilarious, I laughed so hard I almost wet myself when my son told me that... Great stuff!!! Sociopathy, Psychopathy, and even cheating are pretty common....well...everywhere on the internet these days honestly...
They are not limited to EVE, and they are *certainly* not limited to *any* single play-style within EVE...
It is also ridiculous to assume such characteristics about someone based on their in-game activities in EVE, or in any other role-playing game. The entire point of such games is to let you have an online virtual existence *separate* from your ordinary life...And while I'm sure there are some people who play in game much the same as they live in real life - they are the exception rather than the rule.
The only play-style of which is probably *is* fair to make an assumption would be the actual bot-users. We can probably safely assume some Psychopathic tendencies in their personalities that allow them to casually disregard rules/social norms. We can also probably safely assume that if they bother to cheat in EVE they cheat in other games that they play...
However, if you identify someone as a botter - rather than lecuring them on how horrible they are as a person your time would likely be better spent simply reporting them to CCP so they can be removed from the game ASAP. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
498
|
Posted - 2016.08.12 13:31:51 -
[120] - Quote
Dracvlad wrote:Before you go off on your high horse, I played a game called the Hunting, a PBM game, a certain person who also played this game went on a shooting spree in Hungerford in the UK. This game involved killing people in imaginative ways, I played it for about 5 months. I had the dubious pleasure of being visited by Her Majesty's police because I also went pistol shooting as a hobby at the time.
Seriously... I didn't say sociopaths and psychopaths don't play - I just said they are the exception rather than the rule, and you can't identify them by their play-style. You actually provided a good example of this - because *you* played the same game as the mentally unstable player who went on a shooting spree, but presumably you are not proclaiming yourself to be a psychopath/sociopath. In fact you were a victim of this sort of broad profiling based on how you played the game - as you were visited by the police based on them using it...
I am *not* saying that none of the gankers/wardeccers/PvP players in EVE are sociopaths/psychopaths. I'm just saying that it is ridiculous to label them as such based on their gameplay. In my experience, non-combat players are just as likely to be psychopaths/sociopaths - if not more so as these play-styles tend to appeal to those who do not wish to socialize.
For example: One of my lower-sp alts is in a small corp which fluctuates from 2-5 members and declares intermittent wars in a specific region of space for assorted random reasons....And this corp has become blue to most of the miners who live permanently in the area.
These miners have the unique opportunity to enjoy their lack of being attacked by us, as well as our sporadic defense of them when they do get attacked - as well as drastically reduced CODE. presence because my corp has a tendency to have nothing better to do than insta-pop criminal catalysts/pods moving through our territory while waiting for legitimate targets.
However, not a single one of these miners is content to just enjoy their situation - they all constantly bombard myself and my corp mates with requests to gank, grief, and generally torture any/all new miners who wander into the area. And if one acquiesces to their demands? They want us to keep going. They are more bloodthirsty/savage than I will ever be - they merely lack the skills/courage to train weapons and perform the acts themselves. |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
499
|
Posted - 2016.08.12 15:17:12 -
[121] - Quote
Rather than "Sociopath" or "Psychopath" I think the correct term for all of these people, sadly enough, is: Human
Regular, ordinary, Humans.
I mean (just as 1 example of many) there is a reason that executions (particularly the really gruesome ones) used to be held as big, celebratory, public events. And why large segments of the assembled mobs would join in throwing rocks/etc at the victim if allowed to do so. Sadly enough, that is just Human Nature.
That is why we have complex societal rules/expectations/laws, as well as assorted layers of people/mechanisms to enforce them. Take all of that away, and Humans will be Humans. In a sandbox video game, for example...
"Psychopath" and "Sociopath" are (different and distinct) mental conditions which prevent the person from fitting into society and following the societal rules/expectations/laws, because they are incapable of understanding them or seeing how/why they should apply to themselves.
As with most conditions, there are varying degrees of Psychopathy and Sociopathy - and many (most?) people who have these conditions still manage to get by or even succeed in their societies. However they can be dangerous/frightening because *if* they decide to harm others for some reason or do something else society frowns upon, they feel reduced (or none at all again depending on degree of the condition) societal pressure to not do it.
Back into the context of EVE again now: There is no fixed "society" in the game to impose rules/expectations on people - so they are perfectly capable of letting their Human Nature take over without any societal rules/expectations/laws to stop them, or even slow them down.
And as players tend to form groups and make their own societies within the game...the society they choose to join *inside the game* may in fact set rules/expectations that encourage harming other players, or even harvesting their tears. Ironically the healthier and less psychopathic/sociopathic they are the *more likely* they are to feel and respond to these subtle societal pressures, and thus the *more likely* they are to fastidiously farm tears and cause grief whenever possible. A Psychopath wouldn't get the point and wouldn't care what his chosen society thought, and a Sociopath wouldn't have joined the society in the first place...
As soon as these players leave the video game world, however, their Real Life Societal rules/expectations/laws kick in again, and they go back to being ordinary citizens of wherever they happen to live. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
499
|
Posted - 2016.08.12 15:24:45 -
[122] - Quote
Narun Aeg wrote:Hmmm dudes, who care about the "Sociopath" or "Psychopath" subject ? You are not really going to find solutions this way. If you honestly think we are going to find the solutions to EVE's problems in this thread, at this point...then I have another Psychological word for you: "Delusional" |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
499
|
Posted - 2016.08.12 15:37:27 -
[123] - Quote
Narun Aeg wrote:Yes, and you are a doctor in psychology I guess ? Or Not. So instead of judging humanity, you should do something else, because your speech is pointless. If you are trying to play to doctor in a forum game, well ... You know who is mad. A lack of understanding of why someone would wish to post a comment directly related to the current discussion, and instead stubbornly insisting that the only allowable topic of discussion should be the one that *you* want to discuss, could ironically be an indicator that you yourself have some "Psychopathic" tendencies...
Either that or you cling so tightly to the societal expectation of keeping discussion limited to the original topic that you are angrily trying to enforce it...70 pages too late...
Honestly I don't care to get to know you well enough to find out which one it is. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
499
|
Posted - 2016.08.12 15:49:42 -
[124] - Quote
Lucy Lollipops wrote:Beta Maoye wrote:Solecist Project wrote:Beta Maoye wrote:Extract a database of all about the lost players for the past 3 years. Analyze their daily activities that they spent most time in the game. Form a list of activities from the most popular to the least popular. Compare these activities with similar features that provided by competitors. Honestly sort out the advantages or disadvantages of EVE against competitors for these activities. A general picture of why the game is losing players will be revealed. Invalid. This works only for games that are equal. EVE works on completely different base mechanics than the crap you seem to be playing ... ... which is tailored to the masses to enjoy. And we all know the masses. They're horrible. EVE is a game and a business. It requires enough mass to support whatever the ideology that elite players wanted the game to have. If the game cannot survive, the EVE universe does not exist. The game has to find a balance of play styles for the mass and the elites. Partiality for either side is not good for the survival of the game. This sounds like a good point... I don't think anyone will argue with it - EVE certainly needs to find a balance to keep enough players of all play-styles in the game so that it earns enough money to keep the servers running.
People will argue with you until the end of time however on what that balance looks like, or how to attain it... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
507
|
Posted - 2016.08.13 22:54:10 -
[125] - Quote
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: In a game having its very foundations built on consequences, this change in direction has undone the very reason to play EvE: a competitive game where victory or return back to competitivity is always as close and your credit card is.
You carebears are ridiculous. You all come here complaining how pvp drives people away, reducing CCP's revenue, but as soon as CCP introduce ways to increase revenue, you complain again. No wonder CCP ignore it all. Carebears are not the only ones who are unhappy with CCP's decision to go straight-up Pay-To-Win... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
511
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 12:02:58 -
[126] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:[quote=Dirty Forum Alt][quote=Shae Tadaruwa][quote=Vaerah Vahrokha] In a game having its very foundations built on consequences, this change in direction has undone the very reason to play EvE: a competitive game where victory or return back to competitivity is always as close and your credit card is. Pre-PLEX there were GTCs, and don't say nobody sold them. The GTC forum was extremely busy. EVE has always had ways to buy isk if you wanted to badly enough, yes - but they went from the days of GTCs where it was kind of a hassle to buy/sell them, so most people didn't bother... To the days of PLEX where they could be bought/sold with ease.... To the brief Somer Blink fiasco where people got "bonus isk" to feed their gambling addiction when they bought PLEX (and don't tell me that wasn't CCP supported, unless CCP is going to give *me* a "Stratios Emergency Responder" or other unique ship (only 3 ever released? - all to Somer Blink, as a reward for boosting PLEX sales)... To PLEX + AUR, with all of the assorted new items you could then spend real-world money on and resell in game... To the modern EVE, with PLEX + AUR + Skill Extractors/Injectors. And to those who claim the skill injectors are "just an extension of the character Bazaar" - you are idiots. It is now *profitable* to farm/sell SP, and people are doing it. In just the half a year since they have been released *trillions* of new SP has been created and sold just from the gigantic alt-sp farms. Anybody can set them up, many people are, and they are using their profits to expand their farming collections as well...And this *will* continue until the SP market crashes, one way or another.
You can argue that many games are pay-to-win, and they do just fine. Lots of people enjoy them. And certainly it is making CCP record amounts of profit. I'm not disputing any of that. And you would be correct - Pay-To-Win is now an accepted, common gaming model. It isn't inherently a "bad" thing.
But stop trying to pretend EVE hasn't become a Pay-To-Win game...because at this point it is really just too blatant to pretend any more.
Those of us (primarily old-school gamers) who don't like it are merely prejudiced against it. We certainly shouldn't be telling anybody else to hate it. But we *do* have the right to maintain our prejudices and be unhappy with it ourselves. And many of us will (or already have) unsubscribe over it, that is just the way these things work. If CCP does their jobs right, our places will be taken by more open minded gamers, prepared to play in the Pay-To-Win universe of EVE Online. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
512
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 13:33:14 -
[127] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote: EVE has always had ways to buy isk if you wanted to badly enough, yes - but they went from the days of GTCs where it was kind of a hassle to buy/sell them, so most people didn't bother...
I like the way you immediately tried to feed the exact line of bullshit I asked you not to. EVE has had ISK for game time and ISK for character sales since pretty much the beginning. Trying to pretend otherwise is the worst kind of whitewashing nostalgia. I like how you think you are disagreeing with me...when I literally just said you were *right* about this...
And you are *mad* at me for it...yeah...how *dare* I say you were right...
Literally all I said beyond agreeing with you that it has been around from the beginning is that it has gotten easier over the years...And surely not even you can dispute that...
Malcanis wrote: People have been complaining about "pay to win" since the beginning as well. The actual definition of "pay to win" is "pay RL money to gain an advantage not otherwise available". EVE doesn't have that and it never did. It has, since day 0, had the facility to pay RL money to gain an advantage - CCP's very liberal policies on character trading and GTC sales ensured that.
Oh I see now... EVE isn't Pay-To-Win... It is just Pay-To-Win....
I don't even know what else to say here...if you have suffered a recent head trauma, please seek medical attention...because you have clearly suffered brain damage...
Malcanis wrote: I know you don't want it to be true because it undermines your "when I was young EVE was so much better in an indefinable way not supported by any actual metric!" narrative, but there we are. Your problem is with reality, and only you can deal with that.
Actually there are several easy and very clearly defined metrics we could use: Isk value of PLEX + multiple training certs + skill extractors sold vs the isk value of GTCs sold in the old days would be one... Or the amount of $$$ spent on the game minus the amount paid for subs...
I also was very careful to point out that this *is not* a "problem" - and that the game isn't "worse" just because of this...
The only one with a problem here appears to be... YOU. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
512
|
Posted - 2016.08.14 13:37:11 -
[128] - Quote
And before you jump in and point out that "not otherwise available" - waiting 20+ YEARS for all the skills to train...that doesn't really count. The advantages are *not* available if you do not spend RL money...and never have been. It has always been a savings of *time and/or effort* above all else. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
517
|
Posted - 2016.08.15 18:12:24 -
[129] - Quote
Explorers: The only group in EVE who are actually *angry* that CCP made what they do *easier*
I mean, I understand why, I really do. I'm not saying you are wrong to be angry. I'd be angry too, if I were an explorer...
But it is kind of funny, if you think about it... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
528
|
Posted - 2016.08.16 10:34:59 -
[130] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Nitshe Razvedka wrote:We need to step back from ongoing petty squabbles people, and look to the big picture. We need to make Empire Great Again. For too long we have let Hillary types along with anarchists, 'progressives', codies and members of ISIS run amuck in our beloved EVE. For those who love; freedom, liberty, bacon, the smell of bacon cooking and Bald Eagles, the time is now to push back and reclaim our Eve. We need strong and decisive leadership on this issue. We need a Donald to give Eve a good enema. Are we smelling the bacon and cooking the bald eagles or the other way around? 'Merica! Smell the bald eagle bacon - it is delicious. |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
535
|
Posted - 2016.08.16 16:26:57 -
[131] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:ve been in a big alliance, so I had all the chances to learn what blobbing and structure bashing at 3am is about.
Opinion is based on personal preference. You seem the type that likes the action part of flying spaceships. Nothing wrong with that (except the fact that you can't help but be insulting about fleet pvp and the people who like it).
I feel the same way about small gang and solo pvp, it's not for me, the only time I roam is when my corp wants to get together and screw around, I don't personally seek it out, because I don't play this game to explode ship and make other people cry. When i pvp I am either defending my side's ratting/industrial space and activities (ie killing neutrals in our space so my bros can get back to farming) or participating in fleet pvp that will serve some group goal (taking space for us to use, denying space to someone else, keeping Goons in their place whatever lol.
If i took your way of communicating about things I'd call small gang pvp "organized circle jerking with no point at all" lol . But I don't I simply understand that different people have different tastes. I think you should remember that.
I don't think calling "blob" a blob is an insult. Also, F1 spamming is not derogatory, is... a mechanic when you get to be one small cog in a big machine. Of course that does not lead exactly to skillful gameplay. If anything, big fleets require very good strategists, I concede that. Having played so many MMOs, I have come from an hardcore background, where every individual counts. Imo other games valorized individual skill in a large group more than EvE does. I used to be in a top 10 first boss kills worldwide guild in another game, when new content came we all played together for 11-14h a day and to get first every individual single ability used (at the right time) counted. To the point, we recorded attempts from multiple players and the leaders would check second by second if everyone exactly did the absolute possible best in each second. In EvE you can sort-of do the same, by going 12 vs 30 and similar and still take them out. I couldn't get the same adrenaline, the same feeling of accomplishment, when it was 1k vs 1k and all you could do was to enjoy lag and random hits coming for a random amount of time from a random opponent. To be fair the blob-fights are a bit more controlled now with time dilation rather than lag - though still long-drawn-out affairs and still fairly impersonal for the most part. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
545
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 15:17:14 -
[132] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Fleet Fighters (the people you derogatorily call "blobbers" and "F1 spammers") tend to not care about that kind of action. When I'm in a fleet I'm not looking for 'gudfights', I'm fighting to preserve my ratting space and the ratting/mining/industrial space of my friends and alliance mates (or take new space that we can then install other friends in). The in game proceeds from ratting let me plex my 4 accounts without using my cash. While this is true of many 0.0 residents - there *are* true "F1 Monkeys" that tend to give the rest of you a bad name.
These are the players who *don't* care about the territory or the opportunities it affords - they literally *only* play to participate in giant fleets and press their F1 key when told to do so. What they get out of this is impressive looking killboards and bragging rights - even when such fleets lose the only way to get a bad-looking killboard from it is if you are the first to die.
In addition to paying a subscription fee - these players end up buying PLEX to sell for isk to buy more ships just to participate in these fleets - because they have no in-game income. The blob-fights are literally all they do.
I 100% know these players exist - because I'm at work right now, and I am literally 3 feet away from one of them.
It is a play-style like any other....as long as they enjoy it it is their decision how to play v0v
As for how common they are - there is no way to prove that...but they've seemed fairly prevalent in most 0.0 groups I've been a part of (admittedly I wasn't in very good 0.0 alliances)...
But these are the players that I think of at least when referring to "blobbers" or "F1 Monkeys", etc - and they really do exist, they aren't a myth |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
545
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 15:50:14 -
[133] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:The question that popped into my head reading this is "ok, and?"
There are people who mine just to watch ore fill their holds. There are people who ship spin and do literally nothing else. What does that have to do you you or me or anyone else? It's not your cash their are spending to sub. As I said - they can play that way if they want, I have no particular problem with it.
But when *I* say "F1 Monkey" or something like that - I'm talking about *them*. 9 times out of 10 people like you assume I'm talking about you and jump in to defend yourselves, saying you aren't F1 monkeys.... But at least for myself, I'm not talking about players like you...
That is all |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
545
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 17:17:15 -
[134] - Quote
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:The question that popped into my head reading this is "ok, and?"
There are people who mine just to watch ore fill their holds. There are people who ship spin and do literally nothing else. What does that have to do you you or me or anyone else? It's not your cash their are spending to sub. As I said - they can play that way if they want, I have no particular problem with it. But when *I* say "F1 Monkey" or something like that - I'm talking about *them*. 9 times out of 10 people like you assume I'm talking about you and jump in to defend yourselves, saying you aren't F1 monkeys.... But at least for myself, I'm not talking about players like you... That is all Then you should use a different word for what you mean. Apparently your idea of an F1 monkey is vastly different from what most other people think. Really? How would you define an F1 monkey then - if it is *not* a player who *only* flies in 0.0 blob fleets?
Please, elaborate... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
545
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 17:20:30 -
[135] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:The question that popped into my head reading this is "ok, and?"
There are people who mine just to watch ore fill their holds. There are people who ship spin and do literally nothing else. What does that have to do you you or me or anyone else? It's not your cash their are spending to sub. As I said - they can play that way if they want, I have no particular problem with it. But when *I* say "F1 Monkey" or something like that - I'm talking about *them*. 9 times out of 10 people like you assume I'm talking about you and jump in to defend yourselves, saying you aren't F1 monkeys.... But at least for myself, I'm not talking about players like you... That is all Then you should use a different word for what you mean. Apparently your idea of an F1 monkey is vastly different from what most other people think. Well said. It's not a huge deal, just irritating, people who use terms like "F1 monkey" are actually saying "I'm morally superior to you because I play a video game by smashing 2 or more buttons compared to your one". That makes them jsut as bad as the people they complain about. It's that stupid, we are all wasting precious life time playing a video game. Even in the context of the game the fleet fighter (even if they are doing it just for killmails) is no lesser than some leet solo pvper or miner or banker or high sec mission runner or ganker or whatever. OK...fine...You *are* an F1 monkey....
Yeesh, I didn't know it mattered that much to you that I include you in the F1 monkey group...I'll use the term to describe all 0.0 residents from now on - just for you o7 |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
545
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 17:25:09 -
[136] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:
Well said.
It's not a huge deal, just irritating, people who use terms like "F1 monkey" are actually saying "I'm morally superior to you because I play a video game by smashing 2 or more buttons compared to your one". That makes them jsut as bad as the people they complain about.
It's that stupid, we are all wasting precious life time playing a video game. Even in the context of the game the fleet fighter (even if they are doing it just for killmails) is no lesser than some leet solo pvper or miner or banker or high sec mission runner or ganker or whatever.
OK...fine...You *are* an F1 monkey.... Yeesh, I didn't know it mattered that much to you that I include you in the F1 monkey group...I'll use the term to describe all 0.0 residents from now on - just for you o7 You should try growing up. Or would it be easier to just blame me because you hold a prejudiced attitude about something inconsequential? Either way is good with me. Look, I was simply explaining that I use the term in an accurate fashion - to describe players who could literally be replaced by a monkey trained to press the F1 key. And I know such players exist because I know some of them personally...
I went out of my way to say I do not think the term applies to the majority of 0.0 residents, I know most of you do a lot more than that...
I also made it clear that I have no problem with them playing that way - but F1 monkey is simply an accurate description of what they do...
*You* are the one who took that as an insult, that I wasn't including you...
So...why don't *you* grow up, or grow some thicker skin. You insist on taking insults where none have even been aimed at you, then of course people will insult you. Deal with it. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
546
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 17:34:44 -
[137] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:I'm should grow up, yet I'm not the one calling other players "monkeys" while hiding behind a forum alt.
You belong here.
Oooh, buuurrrrn....
Yes, I, a forum alt, belong on the forums...
Totally going to go re-think my entire life after that one....
Was that even really an insult? I mean I know you intended it as one...but come on now.
I'd say we've derailed this thread far enough and we should get back on topic...but I think we lost that 50+ pages ago |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
546
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 17:47:41 -
[138] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:When I insult you, son, you'll know it, you'll barely be able to pepper your posts with embarrassment smiles (which tend to pop up when someone realizes they made themselves look like a fool) your hand will be shaking so much. Actually I've always over-used emoticons I'm afraid - I stand by my usage of F1 monkey and will continue using it regardless of your opinions
As for your insults, we'll see when you throw one out then I imagine - whenever that happens.. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
546
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 18:14:22 -
[139] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:There's only one way to settle this, ladies SHUTTLE FIGHT! Both contestants meet @ 4-4 , first one bumped off 0 or ganked loses. auto-piloting there right now... (unless CODE. ganks me along the way ) |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
546
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 18:19:08 -
[140] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:There's only one way to settle this, ladies SHUTTLE FIGHT! Both contestants meet @ 4-4 , first one bumped off 0 or ganked loses. Won't work. Shuttle flight requires use of more than one button, and since apparently some of us are so monkey like we can only press F1..... Actually it only requires your left mouse button - not even a single keyboard key.
Unless you manually pilot with bound controls - which is laggy/buggy last time I tried it...
Lazy Monkey
edit: 3 jumps to jita as well - will probably get ganked on the undock |
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
546
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 18:24:15 -
[141] - Quote
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Jenn explained already. No need to repeat it. Actually Jenn never did explain...
Just complained at me rather vaguely...
I believe what Jenn would like to say (but can't seem to articulate) is that the term is offensive and I shouldn't use it *at all*...
But what the two of you actually keep seeming to say is that you are offended I didn't include you in the term "F1 Monkey" - like it is a group you are jealous you can't be part of... |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
546
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 18:28:53 -
[142] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:Who won? Too late to place bets? I am in Jita - don't think Jenn is coming sadly - so I guess I win
And yes Jenn, I know it isn't fair to ask you to come out of 0.0 to shuttle fight a forum alt, and I only autopilotted 6 jumps past lazy CODE. pilots who didn't even gank me. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
546
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 18:44:25 -
[143] - Quote
Maybe what we really need to do is a big free-for-all shuttle fight with everybody who has posted in this thread. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
547
|
Posted - 2016.08.17 19:25:20 -
[144] - Quote
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:Bollocks. Your only stated objection to my usage of "F1 Monkey" is that I don't use it like everyone else. Everyone else throws it around as a general term for all 0.0 residents. Thus - you clearly want me to call *all* 0.0 residents F1 Monkeys....
I really see no other possible way to interpret your literal words. |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
574
|
Posted - 2016.08.19 10:41:46 -
[145] - Quote
The ISD generally doesn't lock threads unless they break forum rules or go wildly out of control off course.
Additionally you may have noticed (if you pay any attention) that if you lock a thread like this without giving the OP time to say whatever he/she came to say - they tend to spam-open more threads in response....So instead of 1 threadnought you get 5-10 mini-threads clogging up the front-page of the forum section.
It may also depend if the specific ISD involved finds the thread interesting to read (for whatever reason) - who knows.
But in any case the answer is not to demand they insta-lock all threads like this |
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
615
|
Posted - 2016.08.23 18:05:39 -
[146] - Quote
Logan Revelore wrote:The game simply isn't up to modern standards. Which standards would those be then?
You know what CCP could do to really bring EVE up to *modern* game "standards"? They could just claim it has been an early-access beta all these years - and will actually be released "soon"(tm). Problem solved
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
707
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 02:40:44 -
[147] - Quote
Laufey Sif Tetseldottir wrote:Because CCP does not deliver ?
Walk in Station Atmospheric Flight Planet exploration Comet mining Asteroid exploration/Archeology by walking Drug dealing in station etc etc
Anyone remember that Minecraft redstone on a POS picture showed at random fanfest ?
Probably it's a part of the problem. Anybody with half a brain should have been able to tell many years ago that none of the things you just listed is even remotely feasible using EVE's code - you would have to re-design the game from the ground up to put any of them in in a way that wouldn't be utter ****.
Look at the *controls* for walking in stations, for example - would you really want to have *meaningful* walking in stations (combat/etc) with *those* controls?
Or the massive lag in response time when flying in first person due to the 1 second server tick delay on every action...Would you *really* want to try to navigate within a planetary atmosphere through that?
Even comet mining - mining ships could never keep up with anything that could possibly be considered a "comet" flying through space... And even if they could you'd first have to scan it, track it, warp to its old position, and catch up to it before you could even start mining... It is just a silly idea.
I mean come on - sure CCP is stupid to keep promising things they could never possibly deliver - but at some point you are also just an idiot for betting sucked in by the empty hype.
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
708
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 12:43:36 -
[148] - Quote
Laufey Sif Tetseldottir wrote:So everybody have to be a ******* software engineer to be able to discuss ? All I see whatever the technical requirement is that CCP promises some gameplay features, some new content, that they never delivered. I don't know what's doable or not, and I don't care, if CCP told me, what about this features ? you will have this, you will do this, I think they know what they are talking about cause that's their job, not mine.
And the fact that I could have been sucked into some empty hype is not the issue, CCP not delivering is still a part of the problem. To be fair they've been more reasonable with their promises for the past few years here - I don't think anything you listed was proposed *recently* was it?
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
708
|
Posted - 2016.09.04 22:09:48 -
[149] - Quote
Valder Ripley wrote:StonerPhReaK wrote:Eve needs to appeal to this generations wants.
...
Cant say CCP isnt trying. But this generation is a picky one. Gonna be hard to reel in these fish. Just gotta give them more of what they want than what they are willing to make for themselves. I don-Št know. I mean, I totally agree with you about what this generation of younger players want. My first question is, how many younger and older players came and left EvE in the last 10 years? Are there demographic statistics? My second question is, would it be better for CCP and EvE to appeal to the younger or older generations wants? I would say, younger players have more time, but no money - older players have more money, but no time. Double bind Whether it is their own money or their parents' money the younger generation of gamers spends *way* more RL $$$ on games than the older gamers in general - so it is really a no-brainer from the financial standpoint.
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
710
|
Posted - 2016.09.05 17:25:10 -
[150] - Quote
Lord Xar wrote:Nice I can see being hard to kill as a fun objective lol .As for me using punctuation like i'm writing a novel on a forum nah I just cant be arsed ;p And limited time and 1 account yes. This means I have to undock so I can play and its a cruel hard world ;) Punctuation is not just for novels...
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
862
|
Posted - 2016.09.22 12:13:59 -
[151] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:Computer games used to require intelligence to play. Now anybody, like Jenna or Shae, or any Dirty Forum Alt, can play. This is largely due to game designers giving up entirely on holding the majority's interest and just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. This new "order" of player sees it as...order...which is fine and dandy to the long ago surrendered. However, just like with Tic Tac Toe, eventually even these run the full spectrum (generous eh?) available. Repetition sets in and boredom soon follows. Bear in mind, we do have those who find staring at blinking yellow lights is entertaining. Yes, we do. Anyway, even logging gets to be mind-numbingly repetitive (thus those who complain about that all the time.) What's amazing is people will still use forks...wait...nevermind about the silverware thing, and don't feel badly about it as you eat your pizza, or hot wings getting all that dye on your fingers you think is the hot sauce. I've always felt, since this thread was first unrolled, it would have been easier to pretend to be intelligent had the question been in English instead of some contorted form of it. The question might be easier to answer if we all didn't have to be psychic (some to more a degree than others) to interpret it. I find for instance, there are less heroine users playing since doing heroine and video game addiction seem to conflict with each other. However, I also find alcohol users not only enjoy this game, they like to bellow that they're drunk while they're playing it! You don't see them doing that when they're driving home from bars, now, do yah? Had EVE changed significantly over the years. Had they not settled for flogging ancient, ill-advised code (for instance) mistaking the trend for future computing being in one direction, rather than another, the list of excuses why the game can't evolve with the rest of reality wouldn't be nearly as long. So, a wider audience (one that isn't a fan of antiques but more current technology) would probably find their ways here and stay a while. But...you have to accept the fact there aren't a whole lot of people that find paying to be ripped off by under-achieving egotists a bargain. In fact, that's supposed to be (in an advanced capitalist society) a sure sign at the very least that you've made a serious error in judgement when making a purchase. The delusional people who continue to believe such is not the case are the "community" here, so....even asking the question smacks of more than just a tad of...gray cell shortage. But, yeah, I had to bump this 'cause I read that subject line and I think it's hilarious. Maybe one day this thread will be as huge as the texture pack thread. Lord knows, it has as much "content". Have a nice day! TL:DR:
Null Sec PvE-ers (Jenn), Industrialists (Shae), and Forum Alts (Hi) are ruining the game!
Also - Old gamers who think that games should require skill, or have consequences for actions - are idiots. Smart people are modern gamers who know that everything should be handed to you on a silver platter, and there should never be any consequences for anything you do. If EVE had gone this direction sooner, everything would have been perfect.
PS: I (Serene) am clearly the smartest person in all the universe because of reasons. Even though all my posts are irrelevant garbage and just complain about the things I (serene) do every single day. Bow down and worship me, otherwise you too will be an idiot!11
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
864
|
Posted - 2016.09.22 18:44:29 -
[152] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:LOL. Hooked every damn one of you. "Blah blah blah blah blah."
And now have explicitly admitted that you are nothing but a troll.
You even used a fishing analogy to literally just say it...
Yay you?
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
864
|
Posted - 2016.09.22 18:52:42 -
[153] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:Dirty Forum Alt wrote:Serene Repose wrote:LOL. Hooked every damn one of you. "Blah blah blah blah blah."
And now have explicitly admitted that you are nothing but a troll. You even used a fishing analogy to literally just say it... Yay you? I'll never hyper-troll like you. It's a talent, I guess. The great deception is that your walls of text merit the time and effort to consume....however, if it didn't matter to you, you'd never bother...you just have to respond though, don't you? Who's trolling this forum? ad nausuem? I could list about a dozen - I'm probably on the list yes - but so are you.
See, I've never really said you were wrong about me. I am an armchair philosopher, and sure, sometimes I'm wrong. Maybe its not worth reading my walls of text - if you don't find the subject matter interesting. I can agree with that.
But what *you* can't stand is that I point out *you* doing the *exact same thing*.
The main reason I'm better than you? I'm not in denial about what I am or what I post. I think you've literally convinced yourself you are somehow different, or immune to your own standards of judging posts... And honestly that is just sad.
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
867
|
Posted - 2016.09.22 21:14:16 -
[154] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:I'm sorry. I don't troll this forum. I have a great deal of respect for it, and had you been around as long as you pretend you have, you'd be aware of this, as are a great many people who don't actively engage in discourse here anymore as it invites a bandwidth busting barrage from a handful of people here who are more than happy to totally derail any thread into a nonsensical, digital chest-beating contest. I take you to task for your disrespect of this venue and its users, you respond only as you know how. Rocket science. I've played EVE for 8 years. I've only been active on the forum as long as DFA has existed. I believe I've explicitly stated as much, and I thought it was obvious even to you...
In the time I've been here, 99% of the posts I've seen you put up, in any thread, on any subject, are clearly trolling. You enjoy writing long walls of text pretending you are smart or know what you are talking about, while clearly pulling everything you are saying straight out of your @** and never providing anything to back any of your wild claims up. You also like to bring up real-world political issues as if they are the root cause of evils within the game.
When not posting walls of text full of hot air and Bull-****, you write walls of text complaining about people who write walls of text full of Bull-****... I don't know why you hate yourself. Maybe you should seek help...
You are literally *nothing* but a troll.
At least most of my posts are on-topic, and I provide citations/references for claims that I make. You can disagree with what I'm saying - and sometimes I'm wrong - but it isn't just straight up trolling like your posts.
I don't know what you *used* to post years ago when "other people" were here - and I don't give a ****. The fact is that all you post now is troll post after troll post. You are *currently* nothing but a troll. And a bad one at that - since most of your troll posts aren't even interesting to read.
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
867
|
Posted - 2016.09.22 21:15:15 -
[155] - Quote
Also I see I made your bio - albeit in edited form. I assume that means I'm #1.
So yay, I won the EVE Forums!
\o/
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
867
|
Posted - 2016.09.22 21:19:42 -
[156] - Quote
Oh, and as for Jenn aSide and Shae... I wouldn't actually consider either one to be a troll.
They certainly have an abrasive posting style sometimes that can rub people the wrong way, as well as deep-seated cases of Bittervet Syndrome - but their posts tend to be pretty simple and direct, and consist solely of their honest feelings/opinions/facts relating to whatever subject they are posting about. You can certainly disagree with them - but you can't say they are trolling. They are participating in the discussions bluntly, honestly, and almost universally on-topic.
I'm afraid You and I are the only ones here who make the troll list Serene. Though I'm pretty sure objectively measured you rank higher than even I do. Your list here is just of people you dislike because they call you on your blatant trolling and bull-****. Pretending anything else is ridiculous - and nobody is buying it.
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
867
|
Posted - 2016.09.23 12:00:36 -
[157] - Quote
Kaivarian Coste wrote:Hmmm, I logged back in after a few months' hiatus to see how the game's changed.
I had previously logged out in low sec, so I launch my ship and blap some belt NPCs for 10 minutes. Then a "pirate" I had added to my contact list jumps in, proceeds to hunt me. I dock into a station, wait 15 minutes, the pirate is still hanging around. I then think about hauling myself back to high sec, realised it would probably take 30-60 minutes to jump/refit/whatever.
"**** this"
log off, load up steam TBH that isn't really a change...
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
867
|
Posted - 2016.09.23 12:04:22 -
[158] - Quote
Jovian Death wrote:Not sure what CCP are doing but what ever they are trying is falling on deaf ears.
Average for the latter quarter hasnt really pushed about the 30k mark. Im presuming they will say we will get the numbers back by introducing the free to play option.
Then when the new people joining EvE will get the bug and start a subscription. Last I heard the "Official" answer from CCP was that subscriptions are *not* down, players logging in is *not* down, and we are all just crazy and looking at misleading data on our end.
Then the conversation usually switches to *revenue* rather than activity - which *is* up obviously with all the new microtransactions.
So officially introducing the free to play option is just a cool new idea CCP is doing to modernize the game - and has nothing to do with any perceived problem of less people playing, because no such problem exists.
Disclaimer: Unless they've made an announcement to the contrary since the last time I checked of course - in which case I'd appreciate a link.
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
Dirty Forum Alt
Forum Alts Anonymous
875
|
Posted - 2016.09.29 12:29:13 -
[159] - Quote
Galaxy Duck wrote:This thread can get to 100 pages, we just have to believe. Now that you've said something ISD will probably lock it about halfway through page 99...
The dead swans lay in the stagnant pool.
They lay. They rotted. They turned
Around occasionally.
Bits of flesh dropped off them from
Time to time.
And sank into the pool's mire.
They also smelt a great deal.
Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings (Sussex)
|
|
|
|